">■■■— -*^- ■'■"■■'■■: 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



~m* 



"IG 



MS 



J UNITED STATBS OF AMEEICA. 



I 

■ 



■ 






THE WOKDS 



THE NEW TESTAMENT. 



EDINBURGH : PRINTED BY MUIR AND PATERSON 
FOR 

T. AND T. CLARK. 



LONDON, 
DUBLIN, 
NEW YORK, . 



HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO. 

JOHN ROBERTSON AND CO. 

SCRIBNER, WELFORD, AND ARMSTRONG. 



THE WORDS 



THE NEW TESTAMENT, 



AS ALTERED BY TRANSMISSION AND ASCERTAINED 
BY MODERN CRITICISM. 



FOR POPULAR USE. 



REV. WILLIAM MILLIGAK", D.D., 

PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY .AND BIBLICAL CRITICISM, ABERDEEN: 



REV. ALEX. ROBERTS, D.D., 

PROFESSOR OF HUMANITY, ST. ANDREWS. 




EDINBURGH: 
T. AND T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET. 

1873. 






<F 



PEEFACE. 



The following pages are meant to supply what the 
writers believe to be a strongly felt want. While many 
useful manuals exist, fitted to convey to general readers 
an acquaintance with the outlines of such sciences as 
Astronomy, Geology, or Botany, scarcely anything of 
the kind has been attempted in connexion with the 
science of Biblical Criticism. Xot a few valuable 
treatises have indeed been issued on the subject ; but 
these are of by far too technical a character to meet the 
wants of the public at large. They appeal only to pro- 
fessed scholars or to those who are supposed to have 
already a considerable amount of information. The 
consequence is that multitudes of highly intelligent 
men who are well versed in the leading principles and 
results of other sciences, know very little of the objects, 
methods, or achievements of sacred criticism. It is to 
meet the wants of such that the present volume has 



vi Preface,. 

been prepared; and the writers trust that what they 
have been enabled to state will be felt to be both in- 
teresting and important, without the use of language 
unsuited to the general reader. 

The prospect which the British public have of soon 
obtaining a revised version of the Sacred Scriptures is 
naturally attracting more than ordinary attention to the 
topics handled in this work. Many of the changes of 
the Authorized Version made in that revision must be 
founded on previous changes of the Greek text. It 
seems desirable that the great body of educated persons 
who are watching with so lively an interest the pro- 
ceedings of the New Testament Eevision Company, 
now sitting at Westminster, but who have neither 
the necessary time nor acquirements for entering 
deeply into the studies of the Biblical critic, should 
yet be able to form to themselves an intelligent idea of 
the need of a revision of the text, of the principles on 
which it should be conducted, and of the results that 
may be expected from it. They will thus be in a better 
position than they can be at present for judging of the 
merits of the revision when it appears. 

It is not indeed to be supposed that a correct impres- 
sion of what the revised translation will contain can be 
gathered from anything here said. Even the readings 



Preface. vii 

for which the writers have expressed a preference will 
doubtless differ in numerous instances from those 
adopted by the Revision Company; while that Com- 
pany must certainly introduce into the text many 
more changes than those spoken of by them. The 
writers of this book must be understood to deal only 
with the principles of textual criticism that appear to 
themselves to be correct ; and for the opinions indicated 
they alone are responsible. 

It may be proper to add that the first part of this 
work has been written by Professor Roberts, the second 
by Professor Milligan. The third part is a joint pro- 
duction ; Professor Milligan treating the texts referred 
to in the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles, Professor 
Eoberts those in the other books of the New Testament. 

1st May 1873. 



CONTENTS. 



PAET FIKST. 



THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 

HAP. 

I. Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament, 
II. Nature and Amount of the Various Readings, 

III. Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament, 

IV. Ancient Versions of the New Testament, 

V. Quotations from the Books of the New Testament by- 
Ancient Writers, 

VI. Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism, 



PAGE 

3 
18 

26 
47 

60 

67 



PAET SECOND. 



MODE OF DEALING WITH THE FACTS. 



I. Introductory, .... 

II. First Step in Classification, . 

III. Second Step in Classification, 

IV. Third Step in Classification. — Part I., 
V. Third Step in Classification. — Part II., 



83 

89 

95 

101 

109 



Contents. 



CHAP. 

VI. General Result of Classification, 
VII. The Principle of Grouping, 
VIII. Determination of the Text. — Part I., 
IX. Determination of the Text. — Part II., 
X. General Summary, 



PAGE 

116 
121 
129 
138 
148 



PAET THIED. 

RESULTS. 

I. Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon important 

Texts of the New Testament, . . . . .155 
II. Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the Text of 

the New Testament in its Successive Books, . . 173 



PART FIRST. 

THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 



PART FIRST. 

THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 



CHAPTER I. 



CAUSES OF VARIOUS READINGS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 




jjjHE autographs of the sacred writers have 
long since disappeared or perished. 

This being so, there is, of necessity, scope 
for critical researches in connection with the 
text of the New Testament. Unless God had continued 
from age to age to exercise a miraculous care over the 
original text — a thing totally out of harmony with the 
usual course of His Providence — nothing could be more 
certain than that slight alterations and errors would 
creep into it with the lapse of time. Even at the 
present day it is a matter of extreme difficulty to get 
a work printed with absolute accuracy. Probably, in 
spite of all the care which has been taken, there never 
yet was an edition of the Scriptures published in any 
language which did not contain some errors. The 
curious misprints which have occurred in some of the 
most carefully watched editions are well known to all 



4 Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament. 

that have devoted any attention to this subject, and 
serve to prove how difficult, if not impossible, it is to 
secure unblemished correctness in passing the Scriptures 
through the press. 

Now, if this is the case even in the days of printing, 
much more must the liability to error have existed 
when copies of the New Testament could be multiplied 
only by transcription. Every one who has much copy- 
ing work to do feels how very difficult it is, for any 
considerable time, to preserve perfect accuracy. The 
mind can scarcely be drilled into fulfilling that merely 
mechanical process which is all that, in such circum- 
stances, it is called to accomplish. It will exercise 
itself about the subject before it ; and thus, instead of 
rigidly copying the document under transcription, it is 
apt, every now and then, to allow its own thoughts or 
fancies to find a place upon the page. Suppose, for 
instance, that one is transcribing a sentence which ends 
with the words " twenty centuries." The first part of 
the sentence is perhaps copied with literal accuracy; 
but, while the fact stated at the close of the period is 
retained in the memory, a change in the mode of 
expressing it has been unconsciously effected in the 
mind of the transcriber, so that, instead of writing 
u twenty centuries/' he sets down "two thousand years." 
In this way the very intelligence of a copyist will 
sometimes betray him into mistakes. He may substi- 
tute one synonymous word for another, or exchange a 
name which occurs in the document before him for 
another name by which the individual referred to is 



Causes of Various Headings in the New Testament. 5 

equally well known in history. Thus, instead of 
"king'' lie may write "sovereign" or ''monarch;" for 
"Hildebrancl" he may substitute " Gregory VII. ;" in place 
of "Lord Bacon" he may be led to say * c: Lord Yerulam;"' 
and so on, — the danger of falling into such mistakes 
berno; all the greater the farther a transcriber rises 
above the character of a mere copying-machine and 
is himself possessed of knowledge and intelligence. 

This general remark will, of itself, account for not a 
few of those variations which are found in Manuscripts 
of the Xew Testament. Again and again has a word or 
phrase been slipped in by the transcriber which had 
no existence in his copy, but which was due to the 
working of his own mind on the subject before him. 
On this ground we easily explain, for example, the 
frequent introduction of our Lord's name into the text 
where a simple pronoun existed in the original copy, 
or where the nominative was left to be supplied from 
the context. Thus, at Mark viii. 1, John vi. 14, and 
in a vast number of other passages, we find Jesus where 
He is the correct reading. On the same ground we 
account for those differences in the order of words 
which are often to be found in the manuscripts. One 
will read " Jesus Christ,"' and another " Christ Jesus," 
just as the names happened to present themselves to 
the minds of transcribers. And there are other readings 
of considerably greater interest which are probably to 
be traced to the same cause. We may refer to Matt, 
xxv. 6 for an example. The true reading there is, 
"Behold the bridegroom;" the reading which has crept 



6 Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament. 

into the text is, "Behold the bridegroom cometh;" and 
we may, without much risk of mistake, ascribe this 
addition simply to the working of the mind of a copyist 
on the passage before him. So, at Luke i. 29, the in- 
sertion of "when she saw him " will be naturally enough 
accounted for on the same ground ; while we feel that 
it would be scarcely possible to transcribe Eorn. viii. 26 
without interpolating the words "for us," which are 
nevertheless destitute of any adequate authority. These 
illustrations may suffice to show how various readings 
would, in many cases, arise, not from any intention on 
the part of transcribers, but simply from the exercise 
of their own minds on the subject which happened for 
the time to engage their consideration. 



O^O'' 



But, in multitudes of other cases, the various readings 
must be ascribed to intention on the part of transcribers. 
Several motives may be detected as having influenced 
them in the alterations which they introduced into the 
text of the New Testament. 

For one thing, many passages which presented difficult 
constructions have been changed to the more usual 
forms. In such cases, the copyist has either naturally 
glided into the style of expression with which he was 
familiar, or has supposed that his predecessor in the 
work of transcription had made a mistake which it was 
his duty to correct. This has been a very fertile source 
of various readings ; and, in dealing with cases of the 
kind referred to, Biblical critics have laid down the rule 
that an obscure expression, or a harsh and ungrammati- 



Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament. 7 

cal construction, is generally to be chosen as probably 
the correct reading, rather than another which is clear, 
or familiar and correct. It may seem strange at first 
that such a principle should be adopted — that a reading 
which it is almost impossible to construe or interpret 
should be preferred to one which presents no difficulty. 
But the reason is obvious. A transcriber was much more 
likely to supplant an obscure or unintelligible expres- 
sion by one that was usual and easy than to follow the 
opposite course. He was far more strongly tempted to 
consider the rugged idiom or the unaccustomed phrase 
before him an error which had crept into the manuscript 
from which he copied, than to change what was common 
and intelligible into what was unusual and incompre- 
hensible. Of course occasions might occur on w r hich, 
from carelessness or oversight, a transcriber would render 
a sentence obscure or ungrammatical which was clear 
and correct in his exemplar ; but it is manifest that, so 
far as intentional alteration was concerned, the tempta- 
tion all lay in the opposite direction. 

A familiar illustration of the manner in which various 
readings would originate, as just indicated, may be found 
in a reference to the text of Shakespeare. Again and 
again have words or phrases which were not understood 
by editors been changed into forms with which they were 
familiar, and which they regarded as yielding a satis- 
factory sense. The text of our great dramatist has thus 
been loaded with numerous expressions which we are 
perfectly certain he never wrote. It is only through 
much labour, and by means of a thorough study of 



8 Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament 

the contemporary Elizabethan literature, that Shakes- 
pearian critics are gradually succeeding in extruding 
those erroneous readings which have, for the sake of 
apparently greater clearness, been foisted into the text 
of their author, and in restoring, with tolerable certainty, 
the genuine text. We can easily conceive that, while 
this process of rectification is pursued, it should some- 
times happen, in regard to the works of Shakespeare, as 
in the case of the New Testament, that readings have to 
be sacrificed with which one is loath to part. Suppose, 
for instance, our highest critical authorities should com- 
bine against Theobald's famous emendation in Scene 3, 
Act II. of King Henry V. They might insist that 
evidence is decidedly in favour of the old folio reading 
of the passage. In that case, we could not resign with- 
out regret what has been deemed such an exquisite 
touch of nature, when we are told of the dying Falstaff 
that " he babbled of green fields/' Yet, if it became the 
settled judgment of critics that the phrase referred to is 
simply a happy guess, and was never written by Shakes- 
peare, every reasonable man would give it up, however 
prosaic or unintelligible might be the wortls substituted 
in its place. So it may be matter of regret to have to 
accept at 1 Pet. iii. 8 the somewhat commonplace 
exhortation "Be humble" for the beautiful precept 
" Be courteous," which stands in our present Authorized 
Version. But still, if authority so determine, we must 
not hesitate. There may often be an artificial beauty 
about error, but there is always an inestimable precious- 
ness in truth. 



Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament. 9 

The following examples may be given of the way in 
which various readings have arisen in the text of the 
New Testament, from a desire on the part of the copyists 
to remove or lessen difficulties. At Matt. xvi. 11 the 
true reading is, " How is it that ye do not understand 
that I spake not to you concerning bread ? But beware 
of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees." The 
imperative in the second clause of this verse being either 
not liked or not understood, the passage has, in defiance 
of all authority, been made to run as follows — " How is 
it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you 
concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of 
the Pharisees and of the Sadducees ?" At Mark vii. 31 
the true reading is, " And again, going from the borders 
of Tyre, He came through Sidon unto the Sea of Galilee, 
through the midst of the borders of Decapolis." But, in 
order to escape the fancied difficulty involved in the 
long circuit which these words describe as having been 
made by Christ, the verse has been altered to read as 
follows : — " And again, departing from the coasts of Tyre 
and Sidon, He came unto the Sea of Galilee, through the 
midst of the coasts of Decapolis." At Luke xiv. 5 the 
true reading in all probability is, " And He said unto 
them, Which of you shall have a son or an ox fallen 
into a well, and will not straightway draw him out on 
the sabbath day?" Here, however, the word "son" was 
deemed unsuitable, as not being consistent with the 
supposed argument from the less to the greater, and was 
therefore changed into " ass " (which is found at chap. 
xiii. 15), so that the verse runs thus — " Which of you 



10 Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament. 

shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not 
straightway pull him out on the sabbath day ?" 

Under the same head may properly be ranked some 
of those additions which have been made to the true text 
of the New Testament. An example occurs at Eom. 
viii. 1. The genuine reading in that passage is simply, 
" There is therefore now no condemnation to them 
which are in Christ Jesus." The longer this statement 
is considered the more it will be felt an admirably satis- 
factory conclusion to the previous reasoning of the 
Apostle. But many copyists seem to have been dissatis- 
fied with its brevity and simplicity. They desiderated 
the introduction of the personal and practical element, 
and therefore (although the argument of the Apostle is 
thus anticipated and obscured) inserted from verse 4 the 
words, "who walk not after the flesh, but after the 
spirit." 

To the same desire on the part of transcribers to 
correct and improve the text before them are unquestion- 
ably to be ascribed many of those various readings which 
occur in the Book of Revelation. As is well known to 
all acquainted with the original, that portion of the New 
Testament is remarkable for the number of ungram- 
matical expressions which it contains. There is no 
great difficulty in suggesting satisfactory reasons, his- 
torical and psychological, why this should be the case. 
But it is evident what a temptation to correct was thus 
presented to transcribers. The very respect and affection 
which may be entertained for a writer will lead to the 
wish that as few blemishes as possible should appear in 



Causes of Various Headings in the New Testament. 11 

his works. These blemishes will be made the subject 
of earnest regret, and will, if opportunity is offered, be 
carefully removed. Who can doubt, for instance, the 
pain which Bishop Hurd felt in pointing out obscurities 
and inelegancies in the text of his favourite Addison ? 
Never did editor more love or esteem his author than 
did the worthy bishop. He dilates with his whole 
heart, and most justly, on the "purity and grace of 
expression " displayed by Addison. Yet every now and 
then a word or a whole sentence occurs which offends 
the taste of the bishop, and which he wishes had been 
different from what it is. Now, this same feeling existed 
in the minds of transcribers towards the sacred writers, 
and led them in many cases to replace an inaccurate 
form of expression by another which was correct. Hence 
alterations for the sake of grammar have been introduced 
into the Greek text at Eev. ii. 20, iv. 1, &c. ; but such 
changes are without effect upon the English Version. 

There must also be noticed under this head the 
numerous cases in which parallel passages have been 
made verbally to correspond with one another. These 
cases are, of course, most frequent in the Gospels. Thus 
the true reading both at Matt. ix. 13 and Mark ii. 17 
is, " I came not to call the righteous, but sinners." Both 
passages, however, have been conformed to the text of 
Luke v. 32, so that in all three Gospels we read, "I 
came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." 
Such cases of harmonizing, though far more common, 
as was to have been expected, in the Gospels, may also 
be found in the Epistles. Thus 1 Tim. i. 17 has been 



12 Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament. 

made to conform to Eom. xvi. 27 by the insertion of the 
word " wise." As the epithet " only " occurs before God 
in both passages, the two doxologies have been harmon- 
ized by the interpolation of the missing " wise " in the 
passage in Timothy, which ought to be read, " Unto the 
King eternal [or, " of the ages "], the incorruptible, the 
invisible, the only God, be honour and glory for ever and 
ever. Amen." The reason of such changes in the text 
is happily so evident that corruptions of the kind referred 
to cause little trouble to Biblical critics. 

There is still another cause of various readings 
which falls under the head of intention on the part of 
transcribers; but it is of so grave a character as to 
demand special and separate consideration. We refer 
to the changes which, it is supposed, have in some 
cases been made on the text from doctrinal views or 
predilections. 

Wq rejoice to believe that there is no necessity for 
ascribing many of the various readings in the New 
Testament to this cause. The ancient copyists seem 
to have done their work with the utmost sincerity. 
Perhaps every one of the readings which have some- 
times been attributed to doctrinal bias admits of being 
explained on grounds which imply no suspicion of bad 
faith on the part of the transcribers. Still, there are 
certain passages in which the variation which exists 
may possibly have been due to the dogmatic opinions 
held by various transcribers, and to some of the chief 
of these we shall now briefly direct attention. 



Causes of Various Headings in the New Testament. 13 

It need not be said how often a single word carries 
in its bosom an important doctrine ; and, bearing this 
in mind, we shall easily understand how strong, accord- 
ing to the bias of the copyist, may have been the 
temptation to tamper with the text. Thus, the whole 
controversy between the Church Catholic and the 
Arians or the Socinians may be said to be involved in 
the reading which is to be adopted at Acts xx. 28. If 
we are to read that verse as it stands in our Authorized 
English Version, " Feed the Church of God which He 
hath purchased with His own blood," there can no 
longer be the slightest doubt as to the supreme divinity 
of our Eedeemer. But then ancient authority is greatly 
divided on the point as to whether or not God, is here 
the correct expression; and many modern critics prefer 
to read the verse thus — "feed the Church of the Lord 
which He hath purchased with His own blood ;" a 
statement which cannot be held decisive, one way or 
another, of the controversy in question. 1 

The same remarks apply to the alternative readings 
found at John i. 18. Some copies read that verse as in 
our common Version — c, 'Xo man hath seen God at any 
time: the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of 
the Father, Fie hath declared Him." But many others 
have the verse as follows — u Xo man hath seen God at 
any time : the only begotten God, which is in the bosom 
of the Father, He hath declared Him." The important 

1 This passage and those that follow are referred to at present 
simply for the sake of illustration ; they will be found discussed 
afterwards in Parts Second and Third. 



14 Causes of Various Headings in the New Testament. 

doctrinal inference to be derived from the latter reading 
is too obvious to require remark. 

Again, it is evident liow the famous passage, around 
which such controversy has raged, 1 John v. 7, 8 (" in 
heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and 
these three are one. And there are three that bear 
witness in earth"), may have been introduced into the 
text without authority, in order to give a fancied 
support to the doctrine of the Trinity. On the other 
hand, it has been urged that the Arians may have 
designedly omitted the passage, from their dislike to the 
truth which it seems so manifestly to set forth. 

As a specimen of the less celebrated passages in 
which doctrinal considerations are thought to have 
affected readings, we may refer to Heb. i. 3. The 
latter part of that verse is read by modern critics as 
follows — "When He had made a purification of sins, 
He sat down on the right hand of Majesty on high." 
And it is thought that the insertion of "our" before 
" sins " was due to a desire on the part of some 
transcribers to show that the sins for which He suffered 
were not His own. 

There only remains to be noticed, as another cause of 
various readings in the New Testament, the occurrence 
of oversight or mistake on the part of transcribers. 
This may be illustrated by a reference to several par- 
ticulars. 

A very frequent cause of error was found in those 
^ords of like ending which occurred in the manuscripts. 



Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament. 15 

Suppose, for the sake of illustration, that a transcriber 
is copying a passage in which the word u disciples " is 
read at the end of two successive verses. He tran- 
scribes the first verse, and then, looking up from his 
work to the copy before him, his eye unfortunately 
lights upon the end of the second verse, no part of 
which has yet been written. He sees the word 
"disciples" which his pen has just traced; and, not 
perceiving that the second verse in which it occurs still 
remains untranscribed, he proceeds with his work, and 
leaves out that verse altogether. This has been a very 
fruitful source of error in manuscripts of the New 
Testament. For an example we may refer to Matt, 
xii. 46. That verse is entirely omitted in some excel- 
lent manuscripts. And, for a very obvious reason. It 
ends in the Greek with exactly the same word as the 
preceding verse, and has thus, in some cases, been 
altogether overlooked by transcribers. Similar mistakes 
abound in the manuscripts. 

As;ain, one word was often mistaken for another 
which strongly resembled it. This error frequently 
occurs even in printed books at the present day. We 
have seen ''humour'' substituted for '''human,'"' and 
"antimonies" standing where "antinomies'" 5 was in- 
tended. Now, in Greek there is only the difference of 
a single letter between the word meaning " edification " 
and the word meaning " dispensation." Hence, at 
1 Tim. i. 4 we find in the Authorized Version "godly 
edifying which is in faith," instead of the true reading, 
"God's dispensation which is in faith." Copyists have 



16 Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament, 

also sometimes confounded the Greek for " they took " 
with the Greek for " they cast," the two words con- 
sisting of exactly the same letters with a very slight 
difference of arrangement. 

Errors have also arisen from the style of writing 
characteristic of the most ancient manuscripts. These 
are written throughout in uncial or capital letters, without 
division or interpunction. Hence a different sense 
from the true one might sometimes be attached by 
copyists to the words. The following illustration may 
be given: — If we write NOWHEEE without any 
separation between the letters, either "now here" or 
" no where " may be understood to be the words in- 
tended. In like manner, some various readings have 
arisen in the New Testament from the possibility w 7 hich 
exists in several passages of dividing the Greek in 
different ways, and from one of these being preferred 
by one transcriber and another by another. 

Lastly, some important various readings have arisen 
from transcribers admitting glosses and marginal notes 
into the text. Examples of this kind are furnished in 
the insertion of these words at John v. 3, 4, "waiting 
for the moving of the water. For an angel went down 
at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the 
water : whosoever then first, after the troubling of the 
water, stepped in, was made whole of whatsoever disease 
he had;" and in the insertion of Acts viii. 37, "And 
Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou 
mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that 
Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The first of these 



Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament. 17 

passages was probably a marginal gloss explanatory of 
the popular belief on the subject referred to, and the 
second a regular baptismal formula — both in course of 
time finding their way into the text. Doxologies too 
were apt to creep in from the constant use made of them 
in the services of the Church ; and various particulars, 
having once obtained a place on the margin of the 
manuscripts, by and by succeeded in intruding them- 
selves into the text. This fact has led Biblical 
critics to adopt as another great general principle by 
which they are influenced in seeking to restore the 
genuine words of the New Testament — that, in most 
cases, the shorter reading is to be preferred to the 
longer, as having been, in all probability, the form 
which the text exhibited . in the autograph of the 
sacred writers. 




CHAPTEE II. 

NATURE AND AMOUNT OF THE VARIOUS READINGS. 

| S the result of those causes enumerated and 
explained in the preceding Chapter, and 
perhaps of some other minor influences, the 
amount of variation existing in manuscripts 
of the New Testament is very great. It is not a little 
startling at first to be told, as Biblical critics do tell us, 
that there are no fewer than 150,000 various readings 
within the compass of the New Testament. This fact 
has, of course, been laid hold of by the enemies of divine 
revelation, and has at times caused no small alarm to its 
friends. Like geology in our own day, Biblical criti- 
cism was formerly appealed to by one class as destructive 
of the authority of the New Testament, and was feared 
and discountenanced by another class as being really 
hostile to the interests of sacred truth. 

As a specimen of the one class, we may refer to 
Collins, one of the English Deists of the last century. 
In his book entitled Discourse of Freethinking, pub- 
lished in 1713, he endeavoured to throw discredit 



Nature and Amount of the Various Headings. 19 

upon the New Testament from the great variety of read- 
ings which existed in its text. Uncertainty as to the 
doctrines which it taught was represented as being the 
necessary result. Freethinkers, as Collins alleged, w T ere 
thus absolved from the duty of paying any regard to the 
claims of revelation. They might safely, according to 
him, ignore the very existence of the New Testament, 
until its friends agreed among themselves as to the 
genuine text. The same line of argument has been 
followed by some sceptical writers in more recent times, 
though, for very sufficient reasons, which will soon be 
brought forward, it is rarely adopted by any intelligent 
reasoners at the present day. 

As specimens of the other class referred to, we may 
mention the names of Drs. Owen and Whitby. It forms 
a grievous blot on the memory of the former that he 
assailed the very learned Brian Walton and his friends 
in such language of vituperation for having employed 
their " unwilling leisure," after being deprived of their 
livings under the Commonwealth, in cultivating the 
science of sacred criticism, and bringing to light the 
discrepancies which existed among the manuscripts of 
the New Testament. In venturing to deal with this 
subject, the great Puritan only displayed his own ignor- 
ance and narrowness of comprehension. The same may 
be said regarding Whitby in the assault which he made 
on the New Testament of Dr. John Mill. This learned 
work appeared in 1707, and was distinguished from all 
the editions which had preceded it by the number of 
various readings which it contained. On this ground it 



20 Nature and Amount of the Various Readings. 

was attacked by Dr. Whitby, and its author was accused 
of having rendered the text of Scripture precarious. 
The obvious fact was overlooked that Mill had not 
invented the variations, but simply revealed them ; and, 
instead of the honour which should have been paid to 
that illustrious scholar for his painstaking labour of 
thirty years on the sacred text, a most unworthy attempt 
was made to load his memory with obloquy, and to 
represent his life-long work as having tended to the 
weakening instead of the support of the cause of 
divine revelation. 

Drs. Owen and Whitby, in their sincere and zealous 
but unintelligent attempts to defend Scripture against a 
fancied danger to which it was exposed, have, unfortun- 
ately, proved the types of not a few equally earnest but 
short-sighted friends of the Bible. There have been 
those, even down to our own day, who have been 
ever ready to tremble for the Word of God when con- 
fronted with the discoveries of science. Such persons 
forget that it is high treason to the truth to doubt that 
it will survive every assault which can be made against 
it ; while, in their ardent but narrow-minded zeal, they 
have sometimes had recourse to abuse instead of argu- 
ment, and have thus given an advantage to their 
opponents, which no discovery, critical, philosophical, or 
scientific, could ever have furnished, 

When we come to examine the matter, we find that 
the vast array of various readings which has been men- 
tioned, and which appears at first sight so formidable, 
loses all power to discompose the Christian, and even 



Nature and Amount of the Various Readings. 21 

becomes to him a source of congratulation and rejoicing. 
At least nine out of every ten of these readings are of 
no practical importance whatsoever. .They involve the 
mere substitution of one synonymous word for another; 
or the use of a compound instead of a simple term ; or 
a change of the order in which different words or clauses 
are to be read ; and have thus scarcely any perceptible 
influence on the meaning of the text. Sometimes, for 
example, in one manuscript, one Greek word is used for 
the copulative conjunction and, while in a second a 
different, but perfectly synonymous, particle is employed, 
and in a third the word may be wanting altogether. 
Sometimes our Lord is in one manuscript referred to 
under the name of Jesus ; while in a second He is spoken 
of at the same place as Christ ; in a third He may be 
styled Jesus Christ ; and in a fourth He may be men- 
tioned as Christ Jesus. These are specimens of by far 
the greater number of the various readings, and are 
enough to show how unimportant they are in general 
to our faith as Christians, and how little reason there is 
either for the unbeliever to boast, or the believer to fear, 
on account of the mere number of them which have been 
collected. 

We may here cite the words of one of the greatest 
scholars and critics that England ever produced. The 
illustrious Eichard Bentley thus writes in his reply to 
the w r ork of Collins above mentioned : — " The real text 
of the sacred writers does not now (since the originals 
have been so long lost) lie in "any manuscript or edition, 
but is dispersed in them all. 'Tis competently exact 



22 Nature and Amount of the Various Readings. 

indeed in the worst manuscript now extant; nor is 
one article of faith or moral precept either perverted or 
lost in them — choose as awkwardly as you will, choose 
the worst by design, out of the whole lump of readings." 
And again: — "Make your 30,000 (various readings) as 
many more, if number of copies can ever reach that 
sum : all the better to a knowing and a serious 
reader, who is thereby more richly furnished to select 
what he sees genuine. But even put them into the 
hands of a knave or a fool, and yet, with the most 
sinistrous and absurd choice, he shall not extin- 
guish the light of any one chapter, nor so disguise 
Christianity, but that every feature of it will still 
be the same." 1 

The truth of the matter is, as has been hinted, that it 
constitutes the security of our faith as Christians, that 
such a vast collection of various readings could possibly 
have been formed. Unless God had deemed it proper 
to exert a miraculous power over the New Testament, so 
as to preserve it from all risk of change and error, the 
only way in which He could bestow upon us the means 
of discovering the true text was by furnishing us in His 
Providence with many different sources to which we 
might repair in seeking to ascertain it. As in other 
cases, He has left room here for human industry ; and 
in the many manuscripts of the New Testament still 
extant (all of course more ancient than the date of the 
general employment of printing) we are presented with 

1 Remarks upon a late Discourse of Freethinking, in a Letter to 
F. H. y D.D., by Phileleutherus Lipsiensis, Part i. § 32. 



Nature and Amount of the Various Readings. 23 

the field on which our diligence is to be exercised in 
seeking to recover the very words of evangelists and 
apostles. The multitude of manuscripts of necessity 
increases the number of various readings, but in that 
very number is found the assurance that our labour in 
seeking after the original text shall not be in vain. 
This point will be made abundantly plain by the follow- 
ing illustrations. 

There are some of the classical writers in the printed 
editions of whose works not a single various reading is 
to be found. And do scholars rejoice on that account, 
or is the text therefore to be regarded as free from 
corruption? Nay: the very opposite is the case. 
With respect, for instance, to the Eoman historian 
Velleius Paterculus, we are told that only one manu- 
script of his work has ever been discovered. Accord- 
ingly, no varieties of reading are to be found in the 
published editions of Paterculus, except what conjecture 
may have introduced. But the consequence is that 
the text of his narrative is in a state of the most 
hopeless confusion. Many parts of it are totally 
unintelligible, and, simply for want of additional 
manuscripts to furnish different readings, no means 
whatever exist of letting in any light upon the obscu- 
rities which abound. 

Again, only one ancient manuscript is known to 
scholars which contains the last six books (xi.-xvi.) of 
the Annals of Tacitus. The result is that the text of 
these books remains in the most corrupt and mutilated 
state. The only way of repairing and restoring it is by 



24 Nature and Amount of the Various Readings. 

the exercise of conjectural criticism. Abundant scope 
for this is still found, and every fresh editor indulges in 
some attempts at emendation, just as his judgment or 
fancy suggests. Now, let it be carefully noted that 
conjectural criticism is entirely banished from the field 
of the New Testament. And why ? Simply because 
all sober critics feel that there is no need for it. The 
wealth at their command in the multitude of copies of 
the sacred text still extant is so enormous, and the means 
of ascertaining, by painstaking effort, the genuine read- 
ings, is so ample and satisfactory, that no one would 
have a chance of being listened to at the present day 
who should propose to introduce any conjectural emen- 
dation into the Scriptures. It matters not how ingenious 
or plausible any such conjecture might appear. There 
is neither room nor need for it in dealing with the text 
of the New Testament. So deeply fixed is this principle 
in the minds of Biblical critics, that were any one 
simply to suggest, in connection with a single word of 
Scripture, that the region of fact should be left and the 
realm of imagination entered, he would, by so doing, be 
felt and declared to have excluded himself from among 
the number of those who have a right to be heard upon 
the subject. 

It will be seen, then, that the very fact of our possess- 
ing so many varieties of reading in the books of the 
New Testament, implies the vast resources which we 
have at command for ascertaining the true text, and is 
itself a reason for gratitude to that gracious Providence 



Nature and Amount of the Various Readings. 25 

which has thus preserved to us the means of discover- 
ing, through diligent inquiry, what were the exact 
words which "holy men of old" employed, when 
they spoke and wrote u as they were moved by the 
Holy Ghost/' 




CHAPTEE III. 

EXISTING MANUSCKIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 

|HE three great sources whence various read- 
ings are derived, and to which we must 
repair in seeking to fix the genuine text 
of Scripture, are : (1) the manuscripts of the 
New Testament still known to exist ; (2) the ancient 
versions which have come down to us ; and (3) those 
quotations from the sacred books which occur in the 
works of ancient writers. No one of these guides to a 
knowledge of the original text can be implicitly trusted. 
Even the most valuable manuscripts contain important 
and obvious errors. The best versions also have at 
times mistaken the sense of the original, and are there- 
fore to be used with care and discrimination. And 
very many of those quotations of Scripture which occur 
in the writings of the Fathers have been loosely made, 
memory having been trusted to for giving the substance 
of the passage quoted, while the exact words of the 
sacred text were not sought to be preserved. Illustra- 
tions of the various kinds of errors thus indicated will 
be given in the sequel. 



Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament 27 

The most direct and important source of textual 
criticism is, of course, that furnished in still existing 
and available manuscripts. To a description of the 
most valuable of these the present Chapter will be 
devoted. 

The manuscripts of the New Testament have been 
divided into two classes, which are known as Uncials 
and Cursives, according to the manner in which they 
are written. The Uncials are so called because they 
are written throughout in Greek capital letters. The Cur- 
sives, again, correspond more with the mode of writing 
in common use among ourselves, having capitals only at 
the beginning of sentences or paragraphs, and being 
otherwise written in small characters. The Uncials are 
more ancient, and, of course, much less numerous than 
the Cursives. The line between the two may be drawn 
about the tenth century; and while existing manuscripts 
of the New Testament anterior to that date can be 
counted only by tens, those belonging to the period 
extending from the tenth to the sixteenth century are 
to be reckoned by hundreds. 

As we rise to an antiquity beyond the tenth century, 
the number of manuscripts to which we can make 
appeal becomes rapidly diminished. In addition to 
some precious fragments, there are only five manuscripts 
of the New Testament having any pretension to com- 
pleteness that can be assigned to so ancient a date as 
between the fourth and the sixth century. To a brief 
account of these most interesting and valuable transcripts 



28 Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 

of the New Testament what remains of the present 
Chapter will be given. 

And who could let his eye rest upon the yellow 
parchments in which the sacred words of our Lord and 
His disciples have been preserved in these ancient 
documents, without having emotions of no ordinary 
kind excited within him ? Long have the hands which 
traced these antique characters mouldered into dust. 
Before the darkness of the mediaeval ages had obscured 
the glory of ancient literature and civilisation were 
some of them written. Beyond all the struggles of 
modern times — beyond all the changes flowing, in suc- 
cession, from the breaking up of the Boman Empire, the 
domination of ecclesiastical Borne, the religious and 
intellectual emancipation of individuals and nations 
effected by the Beformation — are we carried by the 
inspection of any one of these witnesses to our faith as 
Christians. While thrones have been overturned, and 
empires have been founded; while learning has died 
and been buried, and again enjoyed a happy resurrec- 
tion ; while the tide of conquest has surged from shore 
to shore, and one nation after another become the 
leading people upon earth, — it has pleased God to 
preserve in these perishable pages the record of His love 
to man, and of the provision which He has made for 
the salvation of sinners. It is with a kind of reverence 
that we gaze upon these faded yet still legible transcripts 
of the word of God. We find in them the very same 
counsels, instructions, and promises, as are contained in 
those printed copies of the Bible with which we are all 



Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 29 

familiar ; but there seems a, solemnity about their utter- 
ances which can belong to no modern volume. It is 
almost felt, while lingering over their contents, as if we 
actually listened to the voice of John, or Peter, or Paul; 
and, far removed from the stormy contentions of those 
rival sects which have risen up in the modern Christian 
world, were privileged to hear, as within the solemn 
silence of some vast cathedral, or under the quietude of 
a starlit sky, the words of eternal life. We draw near, 
therefore, with a kind of awe as well as interest, to 
inspect those treasures of this kind which time has 
spared, if, on any occasion, such a privilege is afforded 
us. And if, as must be the case with most, we never 
have an opportunity of actually looking with our own 
eyes on these precious documents, we cannot but be 
glad to have them, as it were, brought before us 
through the descriptions of them which have been 
given by the faithful and diligent pens of textual 
critics. 

It is usual anions Biblical scholars to distinguish the 
ancient manuscripts of the New Testament by the use 
of the letters of the alphabet. The designations thus 
given them have been accepted throughout Christendom, 
and furnish an easy as well as concise means of 
reference. 

A, OK THE ALEXAXDPJAX CODEX. 

This manuscript is preserved in the British Museum, 
and constitutes one of the most precious literary 
treasures belonging to our country. As in the case 



30 Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 

of the other ancient manuscripts, very little is known 
of its history. It has been in this country since the 
year 1628, having been sent, in that year, through the 
English ambassador in Turkey, as a present to Charles I. 
from Cyril, then Patriarch of Constantinople. A short 
account of the previous history of the manuscript was 
also transmitted by Cyril, and is still prefixed to its 
first volume. We learn from this notice that the 
manuscript was w 7 ritten by one named Thecla, who is 
described as having suffered martyrdom, but when or 
where is utterly unknown. It has been supposed, from 
some peculiarities in the orthography, that Egypt was 
the country in which the manuscript was written, but 
this is a point exceedingly doubtful. There need be no 
question, however, that it was brought by Cyril from 
Alexandria; and, on this account, it is generally 
spoken of as the Codex Alexandrinus, or Alexandrian 
Manuscript. 

Several considerations lead us to the conclusion that 
this manuscript is not less than 1400 years old, belong- 
ing to a date about the middle of the fifth century. 
As already stated, it is written throughout in capital 
letters, and this of itself is a mark of high antiquity. 
The letters are in general of uniform size, the excep- 
tions being at the commencement of a new section, 
where a larger character is used, and in places, chiefly 
at the end of lines, in w T hich the transcriber, being 
pressed for space, has made use of smaller letters. 
Another indication of the very ancient date of the 
manuscript is found in the fact that no division occurs 



Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament 31 

between the words ; and that, except at the close of the 
sentences or paragraphs, no punctuation exists. This 
peculiarity, common to all the most ancient manuscripts, 
causes at first no small difficulty to the reader. Every 
one will understand this by glancing at the following 
familiar verse, given in English in imitation of the 
fashion followed in Greek by the early uncial manuscripts. 

INTHEBEGINNINGWASTHEWOEDAKDTHE 
WOEDWASWITHGODAKDTHEWOEDWASGOD. 

John i. 1. 

The eye, it will be felt, requires considerable practice 
before it is able readily to separate words which all 
seem to run together in the writing, and which are only 
to be distinguished by a familiar acquaintance with the 
language and by the sense of the passage. 

In addition to these marks of great antiquity, there 
are other features presented by the Alexandrian manu- 
script which lead us to assign it to the date that has 
been above suggested. One of these is that it does not 
contain those divisions of the Acts and Epistles — 
generally ascribed to Euthalius, Bishop of Sulce, and 
corresponding in effect to our modern chapters, which 
came into common use about the middle of the fifth 
century. This fact pretty plainly indicates that the 
manuscript must have been written before the date 
just mentioned. On the other hand, as the manuscript 
does contain both the Ammonian sections and the 
Eusebian canons — earlier modes of dividing the sacred 
text, which date respectively from the third and fourth 



32 Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 

centuries — we are thus precluded from claiming for it any 
considerably higher age than that which has been stated. 

Another mark of the antiquity of the Alexandrian 
manuscript is, that it comprises the Epistle of Clement 
among the canonical books. This Clement, who is 
referred to by the Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the 
Philippians (chap. iv. 4) in terms of high commen- 
dation, wrote, about the end of the first century, an 
epistle to the Corinthians, which was, for a considerable 
time, held by manjr churches as of canonical authority. 
It is a very beautiful composition, breathing throughout 
a spirit of Gospel love and holiness, but disfigured by 
some fantastical interpretations of Scripture, and admit- 
ting some superstitious and erroneous notions. Com- 
pared with the inspired writings, it is feeble and 
unimpressive, and it makes no claim to speak with the 
authority pertaining to the word of God. But from 
the high position occupied by its author, as one of the 
most esteemed friends of St. Paul, and as Bishop of 
Eome, it secured for a time great respect, and was, 
during the first few centuries, read in many churches as 
part of the New Testament Canon. This fact accounts 
for its being found in the Alexandrian Codex (which we 
may remark in passing contains the sole copy of the 
Epistle known to exist), and confirms the opinion, 
formed on other grounds, as to the antiquity of that 
manuscript. 

All considerations indeed — whether those arising from 
the form of the letters, the method of writing, the 
marginal references, the order in which the books are 



Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 33 

arranged, or the contents of the manuscript — lead us to 
the conclusion stated above, that in this precious docu- 
ment we have a copy of the New Testament written 
about the time of the fall of the Eoman Empire of the 
West ; and that thus, more lasting than the sovereignty 
established by Eomulus, which, dating from the foundation 
of Eome 753 B.C. to the subversion of the Empire towards 
the end of the fifth century, had survived about 1200 
years, this monument of our faith has already braved 
the ravages of time for nearly a millennium and a half: 
while we are sure that now, under the watchful care of the 
librarians of the British Museum, it will be preserved as 
far as possible from further alteration or injury, and will 
be handed down for the gratification and delight of 
succeeding generations. 

The manuscript just described is, upon the whole, very 
complete. It is preserved in four quarto volumes, the 
first three of which contain the Septuagint Version of 
the Old Testament nearly entire. The fourth volume, em- 
bracing the New Testament, has unfortunately suffered 
more. St. Matthew's Gospel begins with the Greek for 
"Go ye out," in chap. xxv. 6, all that precedes having been 
lost. In St. John's Gospel, two leaves have perished, 
which had included the text from the words " that a 
man," chap. vi. 50, to the words "thou sayest," chap, 
viii. 52. Again, three leaves have disappeared from the 
second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, embracing 
the text from these words, " I believed," chap. iv. 13, to 
the words " of me," chap. xii. 6. "With these exceptions, 

the text of the New Testament is complete. 

c 



34 Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 

It only remains to be noticed further with respect to 
the Alexandrian manuscript, that a facsimile edition of 
the New Testament portion of it was published in 1799 
by Dr. Woide, and that the Old Testament was issued 
in like manner in 1816-28 under the care of Mr. Baber. 
These truly magnificent works may be consulted at any 
time by those having access to the reading-room of the 
Museum, and furnish, upon the whole, a very fair 
representation of the original. The manuscript itself 
is, of course, jealously guarded; but a volume of it is to 
be seen under glass on any of the days on which the 
Museum is open to the public, and may worthily attract 
the attention of all that have, at any time, an oppor- 
tunity of inspecting the literary treasures belonging to 
th,at great national institution. 

B, or the Vatican Codex. 

The manuscript known as B is still more interesting 
and precious than that which has already been described. 
It is preserved in the Vatican Library at Eome, and is, 
on that account, generally referred to as the Codex Vati- 
canus, or Vatican Manuscript. Scarcely anything is 
known of its external history. We are sure that for the 
last four hundred years it has belonged to the Papal 
library ; but how it was procured, or whence it came, no 
one has been able to determine. It is written on very 
fine parchment, in capital letters, which bear a remark- 
able resemblance to those in some of the manuscripts dis- 
covered at Herculaneum. This one fact is enough to 
suggest its high antiquity, and all the other phenomena 



Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 35 

which it presents are in favour of this conclusion. It 
is probably at least a century older than the Alexandrian 
manuscript ; and it has, until lately, been deemed 
altogether without a rival, in point both of age and 
value, among existing manuscripts of the New Testament. 

The intrinsic interest attaching to this precious docu- 
ment has been not a little increased by the strange 
history which has attended it. There is an element of 
romance in Biblical criticism as in other sciences, and 
this comes out very strongly in connection with the 
Vatican manuscript. It has been kept very close in its 
prison at Borne. The greatest difficulty has been 
experienced by scholars in getting even a look of it. 
Once indeed, or rather twice, it seemed likely to escape 
for ever from its cage, and to be fully displayed to the 
eager eyes of Biblical critics. Among many other 
treasures, literary and artistic, it was carried by Xapoleon 
to Paris during his career of triumph; and some friends 
of sacred science had then an opportunity of inspecting 
and describing it. But, on the downfall of the great 
conqueror, it was restored to the Pope ; and, without 
having been examined by any thoroughly competent 
critic, it fell once more under the jealous guardianship 
of the authorities at Eome, An edition of it was often 
promised, but the hopes thus excited were, from time to 
time, disappointed. 

Amid the revolutionary troubles of 1848, when the 
Pope was compelled to flee from Eome, expectation was 
again raised to a high pitch that this precious manu- 
script would become more accessible to the learned 



36 Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 

world than it had ever been before. But fortune was 
once more adverse. His Holiness was speedily restored, 
and, with his return, hope was again extinguished. 

At length, in 1857, Biblical scholars throughout 
Christendom were excited by the intelligence that a 
transcript of the Vatican manuscript was immediately 
to be published. Cardinal Wiseman, in his work entitled 
" Recollections of the last Four Popes/' took occasion to 
refer to this matter, and announced the edition — pre- 
pared by the late Cardinal Mai and revised by others 
whom the Papal government had appointed after his 
death — as being ready for immediate publication. 

It came : but deep was the disappointment which its 
character immediately caused. Instead of that accurate 
transcript which had been promised, it was found that 
the work was full of errors. The most uncritical pro- 
cesses had been followed in its preparation. Numerous 
passages had even been inserted without the least 
authority from the manuscript. The publication was 
little more than what some scholars in the bitterness of 
their disappointment styled it — a copy of the Bible 
according to Borne. So, after all the efforts which had 
been made, all the labour which had been expended, 
and all the expectations which had been cherished, 
students of the sacred text were still left without a 
reliable copy of the queen of all the manuscripts of the 
New Testament. 

After the date of Mai's edition, several scholars were 
successful in obtaining a look of the Vatican manuscript. 
But in most cases, they scarcely obtained more than 



Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 37 

a glimpse. Sometimes they were permitted to glance 
at the manuscript, but not examine it; and at other 
times they had scarcely begun the work of collation, 
when liberty of access to the manuscript was withdrawn. 
Tischendorf, however, was somewhat more fortunate 
in this matter than other scholars. It seemed indeed, at 
one time, as if we should obtain a full collation of the 
manuscript through his labours in connection with it. 
But disappointment yet again was experienced. Instead 
of unlimited access to the manuscript, which seemed 
at first to have been granted him in February 1866, 
it turned out that he was allowed to use it only for 
some forty hours. Admirably was the time employed. 
Within the brief period named, he examined all the 
passages in the New Testament in which the readings of 
the manuscript were still doubtful; he made a full colla- 
tion of nearly the whole of the first three Gospels : and he 
copied in facsimile some twenty pages of the manuscript. 
Subsequent events have explained and perhaps 
justified the arrest thus put upon the labours of Tischen- 
dorf. The Pope assured him at the time that a fac- 
simile edition of the manuscript was just about to 
be published. And, in accordance with this promise, 
the work did come out in 1868 from the Papal press at 
Eome. Pleasing is it to be able to add that this edition 
seems to leave nothing more to be desired. It is in five 
large volumes, the first four containing theSeptuagint Ver- 
sion of the Old Testament, and the last comprising what 
remains of the New Testament. The ideal aimed at in 
Pio Nono's edition, as this one may be called, was very 



38 Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 

different from that adopted by Cardinal Mai, being 
nothing less than to reproduce the very "form, lines, 
letters, strokes, marks " of the manuscript itself. This 
high standard appears to have been scrupulously ad- 
hered to throughout. The editors were two eminent 
Biblical scholars, Vercellone and Cozza ; and they seem 
to have done all that human care and erudition could 
effect to present to the world a faithful representation of 
the famous Vatican manuscript. 

It will not be the least of the glories of Pio 
Nemo's pontificate, that, under his auspices, a facsimile 
edition of this precious document has at length been 
presented to the world. And, considering how nobly the 
assurance given to Tischendorf has been fulfilled, w^e 
readily forgive the hindrances which were placed in the 
way of that indefatigable explorer, when he sought 
to copy page after page of the manuscript. It was 
right that the honour of giving it to the world should 
belong to the Papal court. We hail with gratitude the 
boon conferred on textual criticism by the splendid and 
apparently most satisfactory edition of 1868 ; and we 
rejoice that critics will no longer be thwarted or 
tantalized in their efforts to obtain an accurate acquaint- 
ance with the contents of one of the most valuable 
witnesses to the genuine text of the New Testament. 

C, or the Codex of Ephraem. 
We find in this manuscript some features of interest 
peculiarly its own. It is a palimpsest, that is, a 
manuscript containing two different works, the one 



Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament 39 

written over the other. Owing to the scarcity and high 
price of parchment, it was not unusual for writers of the 
Middle Ages to have recourse to such an expedient. 
Often in this way did they sacrifice some valuable work, 
in order to find material on which to inscribe a monkish 
legend or an ecclesiastical writing of very secondary 
importance. Some of the masterpieces of ancient 
eloquence have been discovered under the literary 
lumber thus superinduced upon them. A strange per- 
versity of taste seems to have seized these mediaeval 
transcribers, when they buried such works as those of 
Cicero beneath the barbarous jargon of some subtle dis- 
putant, or the mystical speculations of some reputed saint. 
In regard to the manuscript under consideration, it 
is one of the writings of the Syrian hymnologist and 
theologian Ephraem that had been chosen to overlay 
the text of the New Testament. On this account, 
the manuscript is generally spoken of as the Codex 
Ephraemi, when not referred to simply under the desig- 
nation of C. It is preserved in the National Library 
in Paris. We know that it was brought into France 
by Catherine de Medici, and that it previously be- 
longed to Cardinal Eidolfi, nephew of Pope Leo X. 
Its history cannot be traced with any certainty to a 
more remote date. But Tischendorf has conjectured, 
with great probability, that it is one of the manuscripts 
which were obtained by Andrew Lascaris, who, on 
the taking of Constantinople by the Turks, was sent 
into the East by Lorenzo cle Medici to collect any such 
ancient writings as had escaped their ravages. 



40 Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 

A lengthened period elapsed before the true value of 
this manuscript was discovered. Not until near the end 
of the seventeenth century did any one observe the sacred 
text under the more recent transcript of the treatise of 
Ephraem. But when the discovery was at last made by 
Allix, scholars soon recognised the vast importance of the 
treasure thus unveiled. Every effort was made to restore 
the ancient writing, and at length, by the aid of a 
chemical preparation, this was done with great success. 
In the year 1834 a particular tincture was applied to 
the parchment, which has had the effect of greatly dis- 
colouring it, but has, at the same time, rendered much 
of the original writing legible, which could not be de- 
ciphered before. Nearly two-thirds of the New Testa- 
ment, along with portions of the Greek translation of 
the Old Testament, are preserved in this manuscript. 
So far as it goes, C is a most valuable aid to the textual 
critic. It had evidently been written with great care, 
comparing favourably in this respect with the Alex- 
andrian or even the Vatican manuscript ; and it un- 
doubtedly belongs to a date not much, if anything, below 
the early part of the fifth century. 

D, or the Codex of Beza. 

There is yet another Biblical manuscript of the first 
class which it is the honour of our country to possess — 
that known as D, or the Codex Bezce, preserved in the 
University of Cambridge. As its name indicates, this 
manuscript was formerly the property of the celebrated 
Eeformer Beza. It was presented by him in the year 



Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 41 

1581 to the Academic body who still possess it. Before 
that date, it had been in the hands of Beza about twenty 
years, and was obtained by him, as he himself tells 
us, during the French civil wars of the sixteenth century, 
having then been found in the Monastery of St. Irenseus 
at Lyons. We cannot trace its history farther back, but 
the palseographic and other internal indications which it 
presents have led scholars pretty generally to ascribe it 
to the sixth century. It is the least valuable of all the 
manuscripts yet noticed. Only the Gospels and Acts in 
Greek and Latin are preserved in it. There are also 
many manifest corruptions and interpolations which 
have been introduced into its text. Still, from the un- 
doubted antiquity of the manuscript, it has strong 
claims on the careful consideration of Biblical critics. 
It was published in facsimile at the expense of the 
University of Cambridge in 1793 ; and in accordance 
w T ith the liberal spirit of the body who possess it, the 
manuscript has often been examined and employed by 
critical editors of the New Testament. 

N, or the Codex Sinaiticus. 

Until very recently, the four manuscripts now de- 
scribed were all the very ancient copies of any consider- 
able portion of the New Testament known to exist. 
But some years ago the learned world, received the 
very unexpected but most agreeable intelligence that 
a manuscript had been found supposed to be as ancient 
as the Codex Vaticanus, and more complete than any 
one previously known, The story of its discovery is 



42 Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament 

curious, and may, in some particulars, be regarded as 
romantic. 

First of all, forty-three leaves of the manuscript were ob- 
tained in 1844. Professor Tischendorf was travelling in 
the East during that year in quest of ancient manuscripts. 
While at the convent of St. Catharine on Mount Sinai, 
his eye was one day caught by a number of vellum 
leaves intended to be used in lighting the stove. He 
picked these out from a heap of other papers destined 
for the same purpose, and soon perceived that they con- 
tained portions of the Septuagint Version of the Old 
Testament. It did not require much examination from 
his practised eyes to convince him of the great antiquity 
of the fragments ; and he lost no time in securing them. 
But. though the monks had been easily induced to part 
with these stray leaves in utter ignorance of their value, 
they resolutely refused to let him see any more of the 
work to which they belonged, now that he had told 
them that it was probably as ancient as the fourth cen- 
tury. Accordingly, on his return to Europe, he pub- 
lished the portion he had procured (embracing the 
entire books of Esther and Nehemiah, with some portions 
of 1 Chronicles and Jeremiah) under the title of Codex 
Frederico-Augustanus, that designation being adopted 
because he had obtained these fragments while travel- 
ling under the auspices of his own monarch, Frederick 
Augustus of Saxony. 

Tischendorf was once more at the same monastery in 
1853, and did not forget to inquire after the precious 
manuscript of which he had discovered some traces in 



Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 43 

1844. But he could learn nothing regarding it. As 
was afterwards found, it had been seen by two visitors 
in the interval ; but Teschendorf, knowing nothing of 
this, concluded that, in some way or other, it had dis- 
appeared, and abandoned all hope of ever hearing more 
respecting it. 

But he was, for the third time, at the convent of St. 
Catharine in the early part of the year 1859. And there, 
on the 4th of February, his grand discovery was made. 
He had put into his hands by the steward of the con- 
vent a manuscript which he at once recognised as the 
long-sought treasure. The communication in which 
Professor Teschendorf conveyed the intelligence of this 
inestimable discovery to Biblical scholars in Europe, 
bore evidence of the emotion which it had excited in his 
own heart, and of the devout eagerness with which he 
set himself to examine its contents. Having glanced 
over the work, he immediately took pen in hand, and, 
insensible to fatigue, he, that very night, copied out of 
it the Epistle of Barnabas in full — an apocryphal writing 
belonging to the early part of the second century, the 
first portion of which had not till then been known in 
the original Greek to modern scholars. Soon afterwards, 
Tischendorf succeeded in obtaining permission to copy 
the whole manuscript, while, better still, he by and by 
persuaded the brethren of St. Catharine to present the 
precious document as a fitting and dutiful offering to 
their great head and patron the Emperor of Bussia. Ac- 
cordingly, it was without delay transmitted to Alexander 
II., and is now preserved in the Imperial Library at St. 



44 Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 

Petersburg. A splendid edition of it, consisting of 300 
copies, was published in 1862, as a suitable memorial 
of the thousandth anniversary of the empire of the Czars ; 
and these, with other less expensive and smaller copies, 
are now in the possession of various learned men and 
public bodies throughout the world. 

Every internal mark presented by the Sinaitic manu- 
script points, in the estimation of the most eminent 
palaeographers, to the fourth, or at latest the fifth, century, 
as the time when it was written. It is thus perhaps as 
old as the Vatican manuscript, and has even been sup- 
posed, on some not improbable grounds, to be one of the 
fifty copies of Scripture which Eusebius, Bishop of 
Csesarea, prepared in a.d. 331, by order of the Emperor 
Constantine, forthe use of hisnew capital,Constantinople. 
Be this as it may, the Sinaitic manuscript has one great 
and undoubted advantage over all the other ancient 
manuscripts, in containing the New Testament complete. 
The Alexandrian manuscript is defective throughout the 
greater part of St. Matthew's Gospel, and also in several 
other places. The Vatican manuscript wants the Epistle 
to Philemon, the Pastoral Epistles, the latter part of the 
Epistle to the Hebrews, and the Apocalypse. The Codex 
of Ephraem is still more defective ; while, as has been 
already noticed, the Codex of Beza contains only the 
Gospels and Acts in the original Greek, along with a 
Latin translation. But the Sinaitic Codex comprises 
the whole of the New Testament without a single omis- 
sion, as well as the Epistle of Barnabas, and a part bf 
the Greek text of the writings of Hermas (also belonging 



Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament. 45 

to the second century) — works which, up to the discovery 
of this unspeakably precious manuscript, had been known 
as a whole only through an early Latin version. 

It is unnecessary for our present purpose to give a 
detailed account of any of the other manuscripts of the 
New Testament. The number of them yet discovered 
has been computed as follows : — 

Uncials (4th to 10th century) . . 127 
Cursives (10th to 15th century) . . 1456 



1583 

Such is the manuscript wealth as yet available to 
scholars for determining the true text of the New Testa- 
ment. Tt is a deeply interesting question whether or 
not there is reason to hope that other discoveries similar 
to that of Tischendorf still remain to be made. For our 
own part, we cannot help believing that such may be 
the case. When it is remembered that a great part of 
Herculaneum is yet unexplored, and that there may be 
preserved in its hidden chambers not only some works 
of the classical writers, which scholars have long mourned 
as lost, but perhaps copies of the Sacred Scriptures them- 
selves dating almost from the apostolic age : when it is 
remembered also, that there are supposed still to be in 
existence at Constantinople vast multitudes of manu- 
scripts, which have never been examined since the over- 
throw of the Eastern Empire by the Turks in 1453 : 
when it is remembered further that, scattered through 
the Oriental monasteries, there may yet be treasures the 



46 Existing Manuscripts of the New Testaments 

existence of which no scholar has hitherto suspected — 
it does not seem unreasonable to believe that Providence 
may still have in store for us discoveries that will at once 
fill our minds with astonishment and our hearts with 
delight, while they tend more and more to purify the 
text, and confirm the authority, of that " Word which 
liveth and abideth for ever." 1 

1 See, in connection with the hope above expressed, De Quincey's 
Works, art. on Richard Bentley (note), and Sir Henry Holland's 
Recollections of Past Life, p. 123. 




CHAPTEE IV. 

ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 

|pST this chapter we are to glance at the second 
source of textual criticism formerly men- 
tioned — the ancient versions of the New 
Testament which have come down to 
our own day. 

It must be evident at once that valuable aid will often 
be available from this source for determining the true 
text of the New Testament. Some of the versions were 
made at a date considerably more ancient than can be 
assigned to any manuscript at present known to exist. 
They thus furnish proof regarding the prevailing text of 
Scripture at a very early period of our era. 1 

But unfortunately there are several considerations 
which detract from the value which might be justly 
claimed for the versions, if their antiquity only were 
regarded. For one thing, it is clear that they, no less 
than the Greek New Testament itself, were liable to 
corruption with the lapse of time. False readings might 

1 The comparative value of versions as testimonies to the text will 
be found again referred to in Part Second, Chap. II. 



48 Ancient Versions of the New Testament. 

creep into translations as easily as into the original ; 
so that, in order to feel any confidence while using 
them for the purpose of textual criticism, we must 
have good reason to believe that they are still in 
our hands in the genuine form which they at first 
possessed. 

Moreover, as the idioms or natural characters of dif- 
ferent languages vary so much, it would obviously be 
very often precarious, and sometimes certainly erroneous, 
to infer from a version the exact words which stood in 
the original. With regard, however, to the genuineness 
or the spuriousness of clauses, verses, and paragraphs, 
versions may justly be regarded (so far as unrevised 
and unaccommodated to later texts) as furnishing most 
valijable evidence. 

Again, it is obvious that even the best versions may 
sometimes have mistaken the meaning of the Greek, 
and thus may tend only to mislead unless used with 
due discrimination. Errors of the kind referred to are 
to be found in every translation, and would, if they 
escaped notice, lead the textual critic entirely astray. 
Suppose, in illustration, that a doubt were to arise as to 
one particular Greek phrase used in Acts iii. 19, and 
that the present authorized English version were 
appealed to for evidence on the point. We there find 
these words ascribed to the Apostle — " Eepent ye there- 
fore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted 
out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the 
presence of the Lord." Now this rendering would 
suggest a totally false idea of the original. No scholar 



Ancient Versions of the New Testament. 49 

would ever dream of any such equivalent for the English 
word "when" as here stands in the original. The 
passage furnishes a case of sheer mistranslation. It 
should be rendered — " Eepent ye therefore, and be con- 
verted, that your sins may be blotted out, in order that 
times of refreshing may come from the presence of the 
Lord, and that He may send Jesus, the Christ, which 
before was appointed for you," the regimen of the phrase 
translated " in order that" being continued into the fol- 
lowing verse. The passage as it stands in our English 
Version would thus be a hindrance, instead of a help, to. 
the discovery of the original text. This example will 
perhaps be sufficient to show that, whatever may be 
the antiquity and general merits of a translation of the 
New Testament, it must be used with caution in the 
service of textual criticism. 

But there is still another and more serious drawback 
on the value of the ancient versions as now considered. 
There is reason to believe that some of the best of them 
have not come down to us in their original state, but 
have been, more or less, conformed to later texts which 
had obtained ascendancy in the Church. They can 
thus only be regarded as bearing testimony to the text 
which was prevalent at the time when the revision took 
place, although the version itself may be much more 
ancient. Of course, the farther that critics can go in 
the way of restoring the original text of the translation, 
the greater does its value become as a witness to the 
sacred text. With these preliminary remarks, we now 
proceed to give a brief account of those versions of the 



50 Ancient Versions of the New Testament, 

New Testament which are of most importance in the 
department of textual criticism. 

Syriac Versions. 

A Syriac version of the New Testament, and probably 
also of the Old, existed in the second century. Eusebius 
expresses himself in a way which seems clearly to imply 
this, and the fact is generally admitted by modern 
scholars. 

The most important of the Syriac versions is that 
known as the Peshito, or Simple. As a translation it 
may claim high rank, being generally very exact in its 
renderings — equally free from slavish literality on the one 
side and loose paraphrase on the other. 

As an authority for the text of the Greek New Testa- 
ment, the Peshito would be possessed of transcendent 
importance were we warranted in regarding it in its 
present state as truly representative of the Syriac text 
of the second century. But there is too good ground for 
believing that such is not the case. The version appears 
to have undergone revision in the course of the fourth cen- 
tury, and to have been conformed to the text which had 
by that time become generally prevalent in the Church. 
This suspicion, or rather certainty, prevents us from 
urging its authority with confidence in the settlement of 
disputed readings. It contains, for example, the doxo- 
logy to the Lord's Prayer, which is wanting in so many 
ancient authorities ; and could we be sure that the ver- 
sion possessed that clause from the beginning, a most 
weighty testimony would be obtained in favour of the 



Ancient Versions of the New Testament. 51 

genuineness of the words. But no more authority can 
with certainty be claimed for it, so far as our present 
knowledge of the version extends, than belongs to a 
witness of the fourth century. One of the greatest services 
which any Biblical scholar could render to the cause of 
textual criticism in our day would be to prepare a criti- 
cal and trustworthy edition of the Peshito. It is under- 
stood that manuscripts of the version are available in 
numbers amply sufficient for this purpose ; and we can- 
not but deeply regret that such an edition was not 
brought out before the Eevision of our Authorized 
Version, at present in progress, was commenced. 

A second Syriac version is that known as the Phi- 
loxenian. It was produced at the instance of Philoxenus, 
who was Bishop of Mabug or Hierapolis in Eastern 
Syria from A.D. 488 to a.d. 518. This version was 
revised in a.d. 616 by Thomas of Harkel, also Bishop 
of Hierapolis. Hence it is also known as the Harclean, 
It is in this latter form that the work is almost exclusively 
known to us. As a translation, it is of a very wretched 
character, being marked by a servile adherence to the 
Greek, which is totally destructive of the Syriac idiom. 
But this very circumstance constitutes its value as an 
auxiliary to the textual critic. By its close and even 
absurd adherence to the Greek we can infer exactly the 
readings of that text which the translator had before 
him. It also possesses various readings from older 
Greek manuscripts in the margin — a fact which adds 
much to its value. We learn from it very clearly how 
great was the amount of deflection from the text of the 



52 Ancient Versions of the New Testament. 

New Testament as presented in the most ancient 
authorities which had taken place at the time when it 
was formed. 

Two other recensions of the sacred text are sometimes 
cited by critics as independent Syriac versions — named 
respectively the Jerusalem- Syriac and the Karkaphen- 
sian. They are of comparatively little importance. 

Some fragments of a Syriac version of the Gospels, 
differing from those already described, were discovered 
by Dr. Cureton among the Syrian manuscripts brought 
by Archdeacon Tattam from the Mtrian monasteries, 
and now in the British Museum. This fragmentary 
version was published in 1858, and is known as the 
Curetonian. Its text is undoubtedly ancient, and on 
that account interesting and valuable. As a translation 
it ranks low, having often, in the grossest way, mis- 
taken the meaning of the original Greek. 

Latin Versions. 

It is generally agreed by scholars at the present day 
that the first Latin version of the New Testament 
was made, not in Italy, but in Africa. This statement 
may naturally surprise those who are not familiar with 
the linguistic condition of Italy in the generations 
immediately following the first promulgation of the 
Gospel. They might conclude, as a matter of course, 
that it would be felt necessary to translate the sacred 
books into Latin for the use of the inhabitants of Italy. 
But we have the amplest evidence that no «uch neces- 
sity did in reality exist. Greek was then a familiar 



Ancient Versions of the New Testament. 53 

lanofua^e throughout that country. Such facts as the 
following abundantly prove that such was the case. 
The Apostle Paul (a.d. 58) wrote to the Eomans in 
Greek. Clement of Eome (a.d. 97) wrote in the same 
language. Ignatius (a.d. 107), like Paul, addressed the 
Pioman Christians in Greek. Justin Martyr (about A.D. 
150), although long resident in Eonie, composed his two 
Apologies to the Emperor in Greek. From these, and 
many similar facts which might be quoted, 1 we conclude 
that no need would be felt in the earliest times for 
a translation of the Xew Testament into Latin in order 
to meet the necessities of the inhabitants of Italy. 

Accordingly, the version known as the Vetus Zatina, 
or " Old Latin," had its origin in aSTorthern Africa. Its 
history is altogether unknown. But we find it used by 
the Latin translator of Irenaeus towards the close of the 
second century, and by Tertullian a little later. Several 
good manuscripts of this version still exist, dating from 
the fourth onwards to the eleventh century. 

This old Latin version was revised by Jerome, one of 
the most learned of the Fathers, towards the close of the 
fourth century. His principal object was to conform the 
translation more accurately to the text of the best Greek 
copies. But he also sought to improve the character of 
the version. He replaced many barbarisms by ex- 
pressions more in accordance with classical usage, and 
in multitudes of passages gave a closer and more satis- 
factory rendering of the original. 

1 See Roberts' Discussions on the Gospels, part i., chap. ii. ; and Max 
Miiller's Lectures on Language, First Series, pp. 90-100. 



54 Ancient Versions of the New Testament. 

As is always the case with a new revision of Scrip- 
ture, it was only by slow degrees that the work of 
Jerome took the place of the Old Latin. Two centuries 
elapsed before this result was accomplished. Partiality 
for the old familiar words, and prejudice against the 
new, thus for a long period prevented the general 
acceptance of the improved translation. But, as cannot 
but happen at last, superior excellence at length pre- 
vailed. From about the end of the sixth century, the 
version of Jerome became the acknowledged Latin Vul- 
gate, and substantially remains so at the present day. 
Just as Tyndale's translation of the Bible into English 
will continue the basis of every version of the Scriptures 
into our language till the end of time, whatever may be 
the changes and improvements which are introduced, so 
the work of Jerome still constitutes the substance of the 
Latin Bible, notwithstanding the revisions to which 
it has been subjected. Many errors, of course, crept 
into the text in the course of the Middle Ages, and when 
the art of printing came into general use, the necessity 
of having some trustworthy edition prepared was 
strongly felt. One was accordingly brought out under 
the auspices of Pope Sixtus V. in 1590, and to it 
the title " Authentic " was assigned. But this edition 
was soon discovered to be very incorrect, and another 
was issued by Clement VIII. in 1592. The Sixtine 
and Clementine editions of the Vulgate differ widely 
between themselves, but neither can be regarded as 
furnishing a satisfactory text. It is much to be re- 
gretted that such a valuable manuscript as the Codex 



Ancient Versions of the New Testament. 55 

Amiatinus, which dates from about the year a.d. 541, 
and presents an admirable transcript of the text of 
Jerome, was not made use of in the preparation of 
either of the Papal editions. 

These early Latin versions of the New Testament are 
of much value in the determination of the text. They 
in general adhere with great closeness to the Greek, 
the very order of the words in the original being, as far 
as possible, retained. They thus bear testimony, where 
still in their primitive condition, to the text of the New 
Testament as it existed in a very remote antiquity. 

Egyptian Versions. 

There are two complete Egyptian versions of the 
New Testament available for the purposes of textual 
criticism. These are known respectively as the Mem- 
phitic and the Thebaic. There are also some fragments 
which pass under the name of the Basmuric. 

We are in utter ignorance as to the history of the 
Egyptian versions. But it is certain that the two are 
wholly independent of each other. Before this fact was 
known, Biblical scholars were accustomed to speak of 
the Coptic as the version of all Egypt — a name derived 
from Coptos, an ancient city in Upper Egypt. But as it 
has been proved that the translations current in Lower 
and Upper Egypt are totally distinct, the versions are 
now distinguished as above. 

It is well ascertained that two dialects prevailed 
in Egypt in the centuries which immediately followed 
the general promulgation of the Gospel. One of these 



56 Ancient Versions of the New Testament. 

was in use in Lower Egypt, and was called, from the 
capital of the country, the Memphitic. The other was 
employed in Upper Egypt, and was in like manner 
denominated from the chief town of the district the 
Thebaic. 

Versions of the New Testament in these dialects un- 
questionably existed in the fourth century, and probably 
long before. No doubt Egypt, like the rest of the 
civilized world, was thoroughly Hellenizecl at the com- 
mencement of our era, so that the Greek Testament 
would be generally understood in the original, in Lower 
Egypt at least, and no need would be felt for a translation. 
But this state of things did not continue; and we have 
every reason to believe that the Thebaic version of the 
New Testament, prevalent in Upper Egypt, was formed 
not later than the third century, and was followed by 
the Memphitic at no distant date. These versions have 
been as yet too little studied to be greatly available for 
the purposes of textual criticism. Doubtless, as scholar- 
ship extends its triumphs, good use of them will yet be 
made. 

The Basmuric fragments present a text evidently 
moulded upon the Thebaic. They are valuable only as 
supplying evidence as to the text in some small portions 
in which the Thebaic no longer exists. 

The Gothic Version. 

This is a very interesting and not unimportant version 
of the New Testament, though, unfortunately, it has not 
yet been found in a complete state. It was made by 



Ancient Versions of the New Testament. 57 

Ulpliilas, who became Bishop of the Goths in a.d. 348. 
He had adopted Arianism, and died while on a visit to 
Constantinople (a.d. 388), whither he had gone to 
defend his creed. But no trace of his doctrinal views 
appears in his great work, except at Philip, ii. 6, where 
he substitutes likeness to God for equality with God. 

The most celebrated manuscript of this version is the 
Codex Argenteus, or " Silver Manuscript/' preserved in 
the University of Upsala. This manuscript derives its 
name from the fact that its large uncial letters are 
written in silver throughout, except those at the 
beginning of sections, which are in gold. It was sent to 
Stockholm from Prague when this latter city surrendered 
to the Swedes in 1648. The date of the manuscript is 
probably about the beginning of the sixth century. It 
now contains only fragments of the Gospels in the 
following order (common to it with Manuscript D and 
some others) — Matthew, John, Luke, Mark. 

As the Gothic version dates from the fourth century, 
it is another witness to the text then prevalent in the 
Church. There can be no doubt that it was formed 
directly from the Greek, as is indicated by peculiar con- 
structions, and by the very mistakes which it contains. 
Its readings are of great weight in passages where it 
supports those of the more ancient authorities. 

The Armenian Version. 

The Armenian Christians seem, for a considerable 
period, to have had no Bible which could be called dis- 
tinctively their own. Up to the fifth century, they 



58 Ancient Versions of the New Testament. 

appear to have been dependent on the Syriac version. 
At length, in A.D. 431, two native scholars, who had 
been present at the Council of Ephesus, brought back 
with them a copy of the Scriptures in Greek ; and 
from that a translation was made into the Armenian 
language. As was to be expected, the Syriac Peshito 
had an influence which is in some places very per- 
ceptible over this version. In its more modern form, as 
published by Uscan in 1666, it has also been suspected 
of having been conformed to the Latin, but there seems 
no good ground for this supposition. As Dr. Tregelles 
has remarked, " Coincidence of reading does not prove 
Latinizing to be a well-founded charged 

Textual criticism has not as yet made much use of 
the Armenian version ; and both its date and character 
prevent us from regarding it as of much importance. 

The iETHiopic Version. 

iEthiopic was formerly the language of Abyssinia, but 
has now been superseded by a more modern dialect 
called the Amharic. It is connected with the Syriac, 
Arabic, and other members of the Semitic family of 
languages. The Abyssinians were converted to Chris- 
tianity by Frumentius in the fourth century, but no ver- 
sion of the sacred writings seems to have been made 
into their language till a considerably later date — per- 
haps in the sixth or seventh century. 

The iEthiopic version of the New Testament was 
evidently formed from the Greek, but by one who had 
no very accurate acquaintance with that language. 



Ancient Versions of the New Testament. 59 

Till a more exact edition lias been issued than we yet 
possess, little use can be made of the iEthiopic in the 
service of textual criticism ; and even were such an 
edition produced, the version itself was formed too late 
to possess anything more than secondary importance. 

The remaining ancient versions of the iSTew Testa- 
ment have too little critical weight to call for detailed 
remark. We simply note their supposed dates as 
follows, — Georgian Version (sixth century) : Arabic Ver- 
sions (most ancient, eighth century) : Slavonic Version 
(ninth century) : Anglo-Saxon versions (from the Latin, 
eighth to eleventh century) : Persic Versions (from the 
Syriac and Greek, fourteenth century). Other versions, 
like the English, though possessing great merit as 
translations, and though derived immediately from the 
Greek, are by far too modern to possess any authority 
in the settlement of the original text. 




CHAPTEE V. 

QUOTATIONS FEOM THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT BY 
ANCIENT WRITERS. 

VERY copious Christian literature has de- 
scended to us from the early centuries of our 
era ; and nothing is more characteristic of 
that literature than the frequency and ful- 
ness with which passages of the Sacred Scriptures are 
cited. It has been said with truth that, had the New 
Testament as a volume perished, the substance of it 
could easily have been recovered from the quotations 
which lie imbedded in the writings of authors who lived 
before the date of the Mcene or first General Council, 
in a.d. 325. 

The evidence as to the original text of Scripture 
which may thus be collected from the extant works of 
the first Christian Fathers is, so far as it goes, more 
ancient than can be derived from either manuscripts or 
versions. Our most venerable manuscripts of the New 
Testament cannot, as we have seen, be dated farther 
back than the fourth century, while the earliest versions 
are to be ascribed probably to the middle of the second. 



Quotations from the Boohs of the New Testament. 61 

But in those writers who are known as the " Apostolic 
Fathers/' we possess witnesses to the text of the jSTew 
Testament (so far as they can be shown to quote it) at 
a period which borders upon, if it does not even touch, 
the apostolic age itself. 

There are, however, several considerations which de- 
tract seriously from the value which might thus at first 
seem to belong to patristic citations in the determina- 
tion of the primitive text of the New Testament. The 
chief of these may be briefly stated as follows. 1 

The text of such early writers is itself not unfre- 
quently doubtful. Those manuscripts of their works 
which have come down to us are of a comparatively 
modern date. Few of them reach higher than the tench 
century; and in some cases not more than a single 
copy of a particular author is known to exist. We are 
thus at times very uncertain as to the genuine readings 
of the original ; and there is not unfrequently cause to 
suspect that, in the course of ages, the text has suffered 
from changes, intentional or unintentional, introduced 
by transcribers. 

Again, as was natural, ere the written word assumed 
that paramount importance which was by and by re- 
cognised as of right belonging to it, the quotations made 
from the New Testament by the early Christian writers 
are often far from verbally accurate. At times some of 
them seem to be mingled with the oral form in which 

1 This part of the subject will be found more fully noticed when the 
comparative value of quotations as testimonies to the text is spoken 
of in Part Second, Chap. II. 



62 Quotations from the Books of the 

they had been transmitted. They are often given in a 
loose and confused way just as memory suggested, or 
have a special turn assigned them according as the 
argument of the writer for the moment required. It 
must be remembered in regard to this whole subject, 
that these ancient authors had no such facilities of 
reference as are furnished by our modern Bibles divided 
into chapters and verses. To verify a quotation would, 
in their case, often have implied lengthened search and 
irksome labour. They were thus very strongly tempted 
to trust for the most part to their general knowledge of 
Scripture in making their citations. 

Moreover, in multitudes of cases, slight verbal changes 
would become current in familiar quotations of the New 
Testament, without giving rise to the slightest suspicion 
of their being erroneous. The way in which our own 
English Bible is often misquoted might supply us wuth 
many an illustration. Perhaps there are few preachers, 
though familiar during a long course of years with that 
book, but have fallen into the habit of less or more 
altering, adding to, or deducting from, particular texts 
in their citations. In such a passage as, " If we confess 
our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our 
sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness," one may 
be in the habit of substituting iniquity for unrighteous- 
ness, and never dream that he is in error. All are fami- 
liar with the addition so commonly made to our Lord's 
promise — " Where two or three are gathered together in 
my name, there am I in the midst of them" — when, as 
its fulfilment is pleaded for in prayer, the words are 



New Testament by Ancient Writers. 63 

appended " to bless us and to do us good." Nothing is 
more common than to hear the declaration quoted, 
" The blood of Jesus Christ clean seth from all sin," 
instead of the " cleanseth us" of the original ; and every 
one must have heard 2 Tim. i. 12 quoted as, " I know 
in ivhom I have believed," &c, although the passage 
really stands thus — " I know whom I have believed, and 
am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have 
committed to Him against that day." 

For various reasons, then, there is good ground for 
acquiescing in the judgment of Dr. Scrivener on the 
point in question, when he says : " On the whole, scrip- 
tural quotations from ecclesiastical writers are of so 
much less consideration than ancient translations, that 
where they are single and unsupported they may safely 
be disregarded altogether. An express citation, however, 
by a really careful Father of the first four or five cen- 
turies (as Origen for example), if supported by manu- 
script authority, and countenanced by the best versions, 
claims our respectful attention, and powerfully vindicates 
the reading which it favours." 1 

It may be interesting and useful if we subjoin a list 
of the principal writers whose works are available for 
the textual criticism of the New Testament, with the 
approximate dates at which they composed their writ- 
ings, and the names of their most important works still 
extant. 

Clement of Rome. — He wrote an epistle to the Corin- 
thians about a.d. 97. This epistle has come down to 
1 Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament , p. 284. 



64 Quotations from the Boohs of the 

us in a single manuscript only. It is contained in the 
Alexandrian manuscript of the New Testament. 

Ignatius of Antioch. — He is supposed to have written 
a number of short epistles in a.d. 107. 

Barnabas. — An epistle of very early date bears the 
name of Barnabas. It was probably written about 
a.d. 130. 

Poly carp of Smyrna. — He wrote a short epistle, still 
extant, about ad. 150. 

Justin Martyr. — Justin wrote two " Apologies" for 
the Christians, which were severally addressed to the 
emperors Antoninus Pius and Aurelius. He also wrote 
a " Dialogue with Trypho a Jew/' Some other writings 
are doubtfully ascribed to him. a.d. 150. 

Tatian. — He wrote a number of works, but only one, 
his "Discourse to the Greeks," is extant, a.d. 166. 

Athenagoras. — This elegant writer has left us two 
short works — an " Apology," and a "Treatise on the 
Besurrection." a.d. 170. 

Iren^eus. — One of the most important works of Chris- 
tian antiquity is the long treatise of Irenseus, " Against 
Heresies." a.d. 189. 

Clement of Alexandria. — His chief works extant are, 
" Hortatory Address to the Greeks," the " Teacher," 
and the "Miscellanies." a.d. 200. 

Tertullian. — A very voluminous author. His prin- 
cipal works extant are an " Apology," and a treatise 
" Against Marcion." He quotes from the Old Latin. 

A.D. 210. 

Hipjpolytus. — Only fragments of his works are extant: 



New Testament hy Ancient Writers. 65 

the most important is his " Kefutation of all Heresies.'' 
a.d. 230. 

Oeigex. — By far the most learned of the Ante-Mcene 
Fathers. Many works from his pen, in whole or in part, 
still exist, and are very valuable for the purposes of 
textual criticism. We may name his " Homilies," 
" Commentaries," and treatise " Against Celsus." a.d. 
240. 

Gregory Tlianmaturgus. — His " Panegyric on Origen," 
"Paraphrase of Ecclesiastes," and some other short 
works, have come down to us. A.r>. 250. 

Cypkian. — A very important writer. His extant 
works are his "Epistles" and "Treatises" — all most 
valuable for the light they shed on early ecclesiastical 
history, as well as for the aid they give in textual 
criticism, a.d. 252. 

Methodius. — He wrote a large work "Against Por- 
phyry," now lost. We still possess his " Feast of the 
Ten Virgins," and some other remains. A.D. 260. 

Arnohius. — His treatise "Against the Gentiles" has 
come down to us. a.d. 300. 

Lactantius — " The Christian Cicero." His principal 
extant work is the "Divine Institutions." a.d. 310. 

Eusebius of C^saeea — " The Eather of ecclesiastical 
history." Besides his " History," several works of his 
still exist. a.d. 330. 

Athanasius. — The famous opponent of Arianism. 
His works consist of treatises, letters, and speeches. 
a.d. 370. 

Ejphraem Syrus. — Syrian theologian and hymnologist. 



66 Quotations from the Books of the New Testament, 

His works, consisting of homilies, commentaries, &c, 
are specially useful in the criticism of the Syriac ver- 
sions, a.d. 370. 

Epiphanius of Cyprus. — His chief works are "Against 
Heresies," and a treatise expounding the doctrine of the 
Trinity, a.d. 400. 

Chrysostom of Antioch. — By far the most eloquent 
of the Fathers. His works consist of sermons, commen- 
taries, letters, and treatises. a.d. 405. 

Jerome, or Hieronymus. — A very learned writer. 
His extant works consist of commentaries, epistles, and 
treatises, a.d. 410. 

Augustine. — The best known of all the Fathers. His 
extant works are very numerous. We may name his 
". Confessions," " City of God," " Betractations," Com- 
mentary on the Fsalms, and treatises on the Belagian 
controversy. a.d. 420. 

It is hardly worth while, for our present purpose, to 
name any later writers. 



CHAPTEE VI. 

SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF MODERN BIBLICAL CRITICISM. 




[HEBE are few epochs in the history of the 
world more memorable than that which 
marks the printing and publishing of the 
first Greek Xew Testament. As long as the 
Word of God was confined to manuscripts, it could come 
into the hands only of a few, and might be explained 
very much as traditional prejudice had fixed. Very 
profound was the ignorance of the Scriptures which per- 
vaded all ranks previous to the great intellectual and 
spiritual revolution which took place about the beginning 
of the sixteenth century. Many of the clergy had never 
seen a copy of the whole Bible ; and the great majority 
of them could not read a word of the original languages. 
The extracts which were read in the Breviary day by 
day were generally regarded by the priests as constitut- 
ing the entire Word of God ; and even these were, in 
many cases, repeated without being understood — with- 
out conveying the slightest glimmering of Gospel-truth 
to the understanding, or producing the least impression 
on the conscience or the heart. 



68 Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism. 

While this was the condition of the professed 
teachers of the people, it is needless to say how dense 
was the ignorance which prevailed among the people 
themselves. Indeed, when we glance at the state of 
Christendom towards the close of the Middle Ages, it 
seems almost miraculous that so great a change speedily 
passed over it. Looking at Europe for a century pre- 
vious to the appearing of Luther, we gaze upon a scene 
similar to that which the prophet witnessed, when he 
was set down in the midst of the valley which was full 
of bones, and when, as he declares, " there were very 
many in the open valley, and lo ! they were very dry." 
Judging by mere human probability, the speedy awaken- 
ing and disenthralment of Christendom seemed then as 
hopeless as to the natural eye must have appeared the 
resuscitation of these mournful relics of once living men. 
Only a spirit of faith living in the heart of Ezekiel pre- 
vented him from at once replying in the negative, when 
the startling question fell upon his ears from heaven — 
" Son of man, can these bones live ? " And only a similar 
spirit could have led any one about the close of the 
fourteenth century to anticipate that marvellous mental 
and spiritual awakening which, ere little more than a 
hundred years had elapsed, was to take place through- 
out the whole Christian world. 

But when the set time for the accomplishment of 
His purposes has come, God often effects great results 
within a very limited period. Soon did a mighty 
change pass over that scene of desolation and death on 
which the prophet looked. The profound stillness was 



Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism. 69 

broken; and sound and movement — the harbingers of 
the great transformation about to occur — were perceived; 
until at length, in striking contrast to the scene which 
at first lay before the view of the seer, there started up 
from that valley of death a vast multitude of living 
men ; " the breath," says Ezekiel, " came into them, 
and they lived, and stood up on their feet, an exceeding 
great army." 

Now, such also appears the mightiness of the change 
which passed over the Christian world within the period 
that has been mentioned. And when we inquire into 
the causes which, under God, led to this great and 
blessed revolution, we find, as is often the case in the 
accomplishment of Heaven's designs, that there was a 
wonderful working together of various agencies and 
means in order to give rise to the desired result. Chief 
of all, we note the invention of the art of printing, 
and then, as a necessary effect of this, the publication of 
the great literary treasures which had descended from 
antiquity. It was impossible that these works could be 
sent forth to the world, without rousing the human 
mind from that state of stagnation in which it had so 
long been sunk. But while the dissemination of the 
classical remains of antiquity w r ould, of itself, have 
given birth to a mental activity which must have been, 
in a large degree, fatal to the claims of superstition, and 
must have led many to throw off those intellectual 
fetters in which the human soul had so long been bound, 
something more was needed to initiate that great 
revival of spiritual life which is the most characteristic 



70 Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism. 

feature of the Eeformation. The heathen writers might 
be sufficient to destroy, but it required the sacred writers 
to construct. Superstition might fall, yet Christianity, 
in its apostolic form, might not be established. A 
blank scepticism might take the place of a long-dominant 
credulity. The fear of Erasmus that, " with the study 
of ancient literature, ancient paganism would reappear," 
might be realized ; and, as has happened in other cases, 
men might then rush from the slavish acceptance of 
grovelling superstitions to a bold and impious denial of 
the most certain and sacred scriptural truths. 

From this danger Christendom was saved, as it only 
could be saved, by the general circulation of the inspired 
Word of God. Without this the Eeformation, in its 
best and highest sense, would have been impossible. 
The Scriptures alone could form a foundation on which 
the fabric of primitive Christianity might anew be 
raised ; and hence there attaches the deepest interest to 
the printing and publishing of the first Greek New 
Testament — the issue through the press of that precious 
volume which was to bear fresh life and peace, instruc- 
tion and salvation, to the world. 

The first portions of the Greek Testament ever 
printed were the songs of the Virgin Mary and 
Zacharias, from the opening chapter of St. Luke's 
Gospel. These were appended to a Greek edition of 
the Psalms which appeared at Venice in the year 1486. 
A considerable period elapsed before any attempt was 
made to print and publish the whole New Testament. 
It was not till 1516 — a year so memorable on other 



Sketch of the History of Modem Biblical Criticism. 71 

accounts — that Erasmus gave his first edition to the 
world, and thus did more to facilitate the triumph of 
Luther in his arduous struggle than could, in any other 
way, have been accomplished. 

Although, however, the New Testament of Erasmus 
was the first one actually published, there was another 
printed, some few years previously, under strictly Eomish 
influences. It is somewhat remarkable that Spain, so 
intolerant until recent years of the free circulation 
of the Bible, has the honour of being the country in 
which an edition of the Sacred Scriptures was first 
printed. About the beginning of the sixteenth century, 
the able and accomplished Cardinal Ximenes began 
to prepare a Polyglott Bible ; and the work was finished, 
so far as regards the printing of the New Testament, 
before Erasmus had even begun to make any prepara- 
tions for his edition. Some years, however, were allowed 
to pass before this great work of Ximenes was authorized 
to be published. It is known as the Complutensian 
edition, from the place at which it appeared — Com- 
plutum being the Latin name of Alcala in Spain. There 
are now hardly any means of ascertaining what were 
the manuscripts used in the preparation of this New 
Testament. They seem to have been of no great value, 
for its readings rarely agree, in controverted passages, 
with those of the most ancient authorities formerly de- 
scribed. Moreover, it has been strongly contended by 
some, though as stoutly denied by others, that the 
Complutensian editors allowed an undue influence in 
their work to the Latin Vulgate, which has always been 



72 Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism. 

so highly esteemed by the Church of Eome. Some 
countenance, certainly, seems to be given to this 
suspicion, by a curious remark and comparison which 
they make in their preface to the Old Testament. Their 
plan was to print the Latin in the central column as the 
place of honour, and to surround it on either side by the 
Septuagint Greek and the original Hebrew. Eeferring 
to this, they compare the Vulgate to Christ crucified be- 
tween the tivo thieves (!) — the one thief being the Greek 
Church, which was denounced as being heretical, and the 
other thief being the nation of the Jews, whom they 
accused of having corrupted the Hebrew as often as 
it differed from the Latin. 

The Complutensian text, although the first ever 
printed, has had but small influence on subsequent 
editions of the New Testament. It possesses therefore 
comparatively little interest at the present day, and will 
probably never again be reprinted. 

Very different has it proved with the edition published 
by Erasmus. That has been the basis of all the ordinary 
editions of the Scriptures which have since been 
published, from generation to generation. From it has 
been derived in substance our oivn Authorized English 
Testament. It is, therefore, a point of the deepest 
interest to us to ascertain on w^hat critical authority the 
edition of Erasmus rests. And on investigating this 
matter, we are led both to acknowledge the gracious 
working of Divine Providence in the past, and to see 
what is our own manifest duty at the present day. 
"When we remember that our Authorized Version was 



Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism. 73 

formed more than 250 years ago, and that then not one 
of those ancient and precious manuscripts which have 
been described was available for the purposes of 
criticism, we might well entertain the fear lest the 
Bible known to us from infancy should prove to be 
seriously misleading, as having been formed from a very 
erroneous text. And when we ask what were the 
manuscripts which Erasmus employed at first, and what 
those were which the editors immediately following him 
used, till what is known as the " Eeceived Text " was 
produced, we find that our apprehensions seem to have 
but too good foundation. It was not for long that the 
ample materials which we now possess for fixing 
accurately the true readings of Scripture came into the 
hands of Biblical scholars. Erasmus, and his followers 
for a century, had but a few modern manuscripts which 
they could consult in preparing their editions of the 
New Testament. They were such as happened to be 
within their reach; and these were of a character on 
which no great reliance could be placed. To show how 
meagre were the resources of Erasmus, it may be 
mentioned that he had only a single manuscript of the 
Apocalypse, and that even the one which he possessed 
was not complete. A part of the New Testament 
would thus have been altogether wanting in his first 
edition had he not ventured to supply it by transla- 
tion from the Latin. He took the Vulgate, and con- 
jecturally retranslated it into Greek. It thus happens 
that, in the ordinary editions of the Greek New Testa- 
ment, there are words still existing, which so far 



74 Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism. 

from resting on any manuscript authority, or having 
any claim to be regarded as inspired, were plainly 
and confessedly inserted in the text from mere con- 
jecture. 

Yet. notwithstanding this, and all the more on account 
• of it, the common text of the Greek New Testament 
excites our deepest wonder and admiration. We cannot 
but regard it as a kind of Providential miracle. Although 
so much has been done since it was formed to throw 
light upon the true text of Scripture, that which was at 
first adopted remains, for almost all practical purposes, 
totally unaffected. God has never interfered w T ith 
human liberty, yet it is impossible to look back upon 
the history of the Bible, and especially on the point now 
under consideration, without being struck with the 
manner in which He has continually watched over His 
own holy Word. We may truly and thankfully say that 
He led Erasmus and his followers " in a way which they 
knew not/' so as to secure a substantial accuracy in those 
transcripts of the New Testament which they presented 
to the world. Many have come after them, and devoted 
their lives to the discovery and publication of sacred 
manuscripts ; but largely as the stores of Biblical 
criticism have been increased since their day, the New 
Testament remains practically almost the same as it was 
in the first editions. Changes have indeed been made : 
doubts respecting numerous passages have been started : 
fluctuations have taken place in the opinions of scholars 
as to the true reading in a few important texts ; but, upon 
the whole, criticism, even in its most rigorous exercise, has 



Sketch of the History of Modem Biblical Criticism. 75 

not demanded any great or material alterations in the 
text. 

This is a very comforting and satisfactory thought to 
all the friends of Scripture, yet it is surely not one which 
should lead them to undervalue the labours of those 
who devote their time and strength to critical pursuits. 
The object of such students is to discover and present 
to the Christian world, in as pure a form as possible, 
that message which our Heavenly Father has addressed 
to His children upon earth. The more loyal and loving 
our hearts are towards Him, the more will we feel it our 
incumbent duty to encourage, in every way w T e can, those 
scholarly studies which have for their end the noble 
purpose of freeing the Scriptures from every taint of 
error that may, through human infirmity, have crept into 
their text, and restoring that text to the form which 
it exhibited in the autographs of the sacred writers. 

Let it be remembered also, that to such investigations 
is due the confidence which we may justly place in our 
Bibles, as they have been familiar to us all our days ; 
and that, however little the labours of sacred critics may 
be heard of by the Christian world at large, yet it is to 
these that the faith and comfort of all believers are to 
be ascribed. By these there is a wall of defence drawn 
around the Bible of the humblest worshipper. By these 
the enemies of divine truth are prevented from making 
that assault upon the hopes of the Christian community, 
which they would not defer for a moment had they the 
least chance of being successful. By the labour of some 
scholar whose name perhaps few have ever heard — who 



76 Sketch of the History of Modem Biblical Criticism. 

sits buried among books and manuscripts which most 
men would think repellent and unedifying, and whose 
life is spent in pursuits which many in their haste might 
stigmatize as useless — by his labours, Christians in 
general are protected from the assertion or insinuation 
that the passage of Scripture which may have cheered 
their hearts has no valid claim to be regarded as the 
Word of God. Honour then to those who are wearing 
health and strength away in the noble work of ascer- 
taining and elucidating the true text of Scripture! As 
much as the missionary who leaves home and kindred 
to bear the glad tidings of salvation to the heathen : as 
truly as the martyr who seals with his blood the testi- 
mony he has borne for Christ — are these men doing the 
the work of God, and earning the reward which will at 
last be given to all His good and faithful servants. But 
for them, the message which the missionary bears might 
be scoffed at as a fable; but for them, the faith for 
which the martyr dies might be ridiculed as a delu- 
sion; but for them, the Gospel which the minister 
preaches might be laughed at as the offspring of human 
credulity or imposture ; and therefore to them be given 
that honour which is their due, and let those services be 
acknowledged and appreciated which are rendered by 
them, not to a sect, a church, or a nation merely, but to 
mankind at large, and by which not only the present, 
but all future ages, are laid under most deep and true 
and lasting obligations. 

On looking back upon the history of sacred criticism 



Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism. 77 

since the days of Erasmus, it is pleasing to discover that 
some of the very first and most eminent men who 
devoted themselves to such studies belonged to our own 
country. After Beza's editions of the New Testament, 
which appeared towards the close of the sixteenth cen- 
tury, little was done in textual criticism till the publica- 
tion of Walton's Polyglott in the year 1657. This great 
work contained a collection of various readings from 
numerous important manuscripts, though it still adhered 
to that text which had now acquired a kind of prescrip- 
tive right, and which, in the opinion of many, it was 
sacrilegious to touch. Ignorance is often as irritable 
as it is clamorous ; and learning must, not unfre- 
quently, sustain a severe conflict before its conclusions 
are accepted. Thus it proved in the case now before us. 
If there is any duty plainly incumbent on Christians, it 
is surely to see that they possess the Word of God in as 
pure a form as Providence has placed within their power. 
And when new manuscripts were brought to light, of a 
far higher value than those which had been used in the 
first printed editions of the JSTew Testament, it might 
have been expected that some gratitude would be dis- 
played to those scholars who had discovered them, and 
who sought by their aid to present to the Christian 
world a closer approximation to the genuine text of 
Scripture. But as has happened in many similar cases, 
and as will doubtless happen again, very different was 
the result. Men allowed their own notions of expe- 
diency to outweigh all considerations of truth and duty. 
The established text with all its corruptions was clung 



78 Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism. 

to, in preference to that which had so greatly superior 
claims to acceptance ; and those scholars who ventured 
to call attention to the various readings furnished by 
newly-discovered manuscripts, instead of being thanked 
for their pains, were (as we formerly saw) branded 
as the .enemies of revelation. Future ages, however, 
have acknowledged the value of those labours which 
were at first so much decried; and the names of 
Walton, Mill, and Bentley will ever be names of 
which England will be proud in connection with the 
pursuit of sacred learning and the advancement of 
textual criticism. 

After this period, the glory of devotedness to Biblical 
science passed away from Britain, and rested on a 
country to which the whole Christian world is now under 
the' deepest obligation. However much we may deplore 
some of the phases which both faith and unbelief have 
assumed in Germany, it is but fair that we should also 
acknowledge the incalculable service which German 
scholarship has rendered to the cause of divine truth. 
In regard, more especially, to the text of Scripture, the 
names of Bengel and Griesbach need only to be men- 
tioned in order to suggest how much we owe to the 
former labours of Continental critics. Nor have German 
scholars ceased to toil in our behalf at the present day. 
Not to weary the reader with a long list of names, we may 
simply mention that of Tischendorf, who has had the hon- 
our of finding more manuscripts of the New Testament 
than any other labourer in this field, and whose previous 
discoveries have (as formerly described) all been sur- 



Sketch of the History of Modem Biblical Criticism. 79 

passed and crowned by his bringing to light a manu- 
script which carries us back at least to the days of 
Augustine and Jerome, and whose worth it is scarcely 
possible to overestimate. 

It is gratifying to be able to add that our own country 
has recently been reoccupying the honourable position 
which she formerly held in the department of textual 
criticism. No labourers in this field have ever surpassed 
Dr. Tregelles and Dr. Scrivener in the zeal, diligence, 
and painstaking accuracy with which they have devoted 
their lives to this study. Others also, like the late 
lamented Dean Alford, have done much to give a stimu- 
lus to such pursuits. There are not a few cheering evi- 
dences that a taste for the study of textual criticism is 
reviving in our country ; and if this taste is duly fostered 
and properly directed, we may augur from it the happiest- 
results. 

The New Testament .Revision Company, now sitting 
periodically at Westminster, of necessity give their 
most careful attention to the settlement of the true text. 
This is the very first duty which they have to discharge. 
It w r ould be vain to make an improved translation, how- 
ever excellent, if that w r ere founded on a corrupt or 
uncertain text. The primary aim therefore of the Com- 
pany is, by the most patient, and even anxious, weighing 
of all available evidence, to make as near an approach 
to certainty as can be made with respect to the genuine 
text of the New Testament. If English readers of the 
new version feel startled at first by finding words or 
clauses omitted to which they have been long accustomed, 



80 Sketch of the History of Modem Biblical Criticism. 

and changes of translation introduced owing to a change 
of reading which has been adopted in the Greek, they 
may rest assured that not a single alteration has been 
adopted without the most serious deliberation, or from 
any other motive than the earnest desire of making the 
nearest possible approach to the primitive form of that 
inspired Word which God has given us to be " a lamp 
unto our feet, and a light unto our path." 



PART SECOND. 

MODE OF DEALING WITH THE FACTS. 



PART SECOND. 

MODE OF DEALING WITH THE EACTS. 



CHAPTER I. 



INTRODUCTORY. 




HE facts of the case are now before us, and 
we are next met by the inquiry, What are 
we to do with them ? What are the principles 
that are to guide us in selecting from the 
great mass of various readings in existence those which 
we may have best reason to suppose were the original 
words of the inspired penmen ? 

It is too generally imagined that we have no prin- 
ciples at all. Even intelligent persons are frequently 
under the impression that the science of textual criti- 
cism is a mere collection of undigested facts, that the 
textual critic has no fixed laws to regulate his procedure, 
that he works at random, and that the text eventually 
constructed by him is the result of arbitrary hypothesis 
or unregulated caprice. It will be our effort to show 
that this is not the case ; and that, whatever uncertainty 
may still rest upon some parts of our subject, enough is 



84 Introductory. 

known to make it strictly a science. We shall en- 
deavour so to look at the task we have in hand as 
gradually to draw a line with ever-increasing closeness 
around the correct readings of which we are in search. 

It has been already stated that there are three sources 
from which these readings are to be derived, manuscripts, 
versions, and citations from Scripture in the writings of 
the early Fathers of the Church. Had we reason to 
believe that all these authorities were of equal value 
our course would be a simple one. Looking at them as 
so many witnesses, each entitled to the same degree of 
credit, we should simply reckon up the number upon 
opposing sides of the point at issue, and pronounce our 
verdict according to the numerical majority. Such a 
state of things, however, is never exhibited in a court of 
justice. The value of evidence there given by different 
witnesses very materially differs. Some have had better 
opportunities of observation than others. Some have 
made a better use of opportunities in themselves equally 
good. One. is better able than another to give his evi- 
dence in a clear, distinct, and intelligible manner. The 
statements made by one accord better than those made 
by others with circumstances already known to us. All 
these things affect the value of evidence. It is the duty 
of a judge to attend to them, and he may often have to 
decide the case before him by the evidence of the few 
instead of the many. Hence the legal maxim, than 
which there is none more thoroughly established, that 
testimonies are to be weighed, not numbered. 

The same principle comes into operation in the 



Introductory. 85 

inquiry with which we are engaged. One of the first 
things that strikes the student of the text of the New 
Testament is the degree to which the many witnesses 
that have something to say regarding it differ from one 
another in the points now mentioned. They have not 
had the same opportunities of observation, for one 
belongs to a period much nearer that at which the 
Apostles wrote than another ; and this, though, when 
taken by itself, by no means conclusive as to the higher 
value of his evidence, is yet at first sight something in 
its favour. They have not made the same use of oppor- 
tunities equally good; for one of two who lived in the 
same age may have obtained his information from sources 
manifestly inferior to those that were employed by his 
contemporary. The same pains have not been taken by 
them to ascertain the facts ; for one may show that he 
has yielded without further inquiry to a first impression, 
while another has looked into the matter, viewed it 
from different sides, argued it with himself, and made 
up his mind after careful and anxious deliberation. 
Finally, they may not give evidence with the same direct 
bearing on the point at issue ; for one may speak to us 
in the original lan^ua^e of the New Testament, another 
through the more uncertain medium of a translation. 
It is clear then that merely to number our witnesses 
will not do. We must distinguish between their 
separate values. We must arrange and classify them. 

Before proceeding further it may be well to illustrate 
what has now been said by an example. We take two 
interesting various readings in the first few verses of 



86 Introductory. 

the sixth chapter of the Gospel of St. Matthew. In our 
English version of the first verse of that chapter we 
read, " Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, 
to be seen of them," and again at the close of the fourth, 
the sixth, and the eighteenth verses, we find the clause, 
" And thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward 
thee openly." In all these cases the words of the Eng- 
lish Bible are a faithful rendering of the standard Greek 
text. Many manuscripts and other authorities, how- 
ever, read in v. 1, "Take heed that ye do not your 
righteousness before men," and at the close of each of 
the three other verses referred to they omit the word 
" openly." Which is correct ? Of which have we most 
reason to think that it gives the form of the sentences 
as originally spoken by our Lord and written by the 
Evangelist ? Were we to be guided by the number of 
witnesses on either side, we should at once have to 
determine in favour of the received text. The number 
giving evidence on its behalf vastly preponderates. 
The number in favour of the other readings is compara- 
tively small. Yet it is conceivable that, if justice is to 
be done, the smaller number may be entitled to more 
consideration than the larger, and that the verdict 
should be with it. In point of fact it really proves to 
be so. All editors of note come to this conclusion ; and 
English readers who have Alford's New Testament in 
their hands will see, on turning up the passage, that he 
reads without remark in v. 1, " But take heed that ye 
do not your righteousness before men," and that at the 
close of verses 4 and 6 he brackets the " openly," while at 



Introductory. 8*7 

the end of v. 18 he omits it. It is too soon to explain 
the grounds of this judgment. We advert to it only as 
a fact ; but. to confirm its correctness it may be said, 
that the force and meaning of these verses are brought 
by it into a much clearer light. The word " alms" in 
v. 1 confines our attention to the first illustration of the 
outward and hypocritical spirit spoken of by our Lord, 
almsgiving. The word "righteousness" extends to all 
the three, almsgiving, prayer, and fasting ; and the first 
verse of the chapter becomes a general precept, finding 
its illustration not in one only but in each of these. 
The omission of the word "openly" is of even greater 
importance. Its insertion spoils the whole meaning of 
the passage, leading us to think that the promise of the 
Saviour is that, if we serve God in secret, that is 
sincerely, without pretence or show, for His own sake 
and not for the sake of human applause, then God will 
reward us even in this world, in the very sight and pre- 
sence of those who gave us no credit for piety, who per- 
haps condemned us for the want of it. No such lesson 
is intended ; our Saviour designing only to teach us 
that, however men may despise the spirit of humble 
piety and honour ostentation, there is Another and a 
Higher who will judge us justly, even that Father in 
heaven who seeth in secret. Men may condemn, He 
will "requite" or rather "recompense" us. ISTo selfish 
thought of earthly triumph over foes is thus allowed to 
mingle with our hope of reward. In purity and un- 
selfishness of spirit we anticipate only the approbation 
of our Father in heaven. 



88 Introductory. 

These examples may suffice to show how much a de- 
cision in favour of a minority of witnesses may after- 
wards commend itself to the spiritually enlightened 
judgment. If so, they answer the end for which they 
are at present quoted. They will confirm to our minds 
the necessity of such a classification of our witnesses 
as that to which reference has been made. To this 
classification we now proceed. 



-.■-. 




CHAPTER It 

FIKST STEP IN CLASSIFICATION. 

5,T has been said that the three classes of 
witnesses to which we have to appeal for 
the determination of the true text of the 
New Testament, are manuscripts of the 
Greek text, translations into other languages made from 
that text, and citations in the Fathers of the Church. 
We ha^e first to make a comparative estimate of these 
three classes. 

Of the three it will appear that we must look first 
and chiefly to manuscripts of the Greek text. For, 

1. As to citations in the writings of the Fathers, 
these labour in many respects under the same and even 
greater defects than those that have to be contended 
with in the case of manuscripts. The works of the 
Fathers, like the Sacred Writings themselves, were com- 
posed centuries before the art of printing was known. 
The autographs have long since perished. It cannot be 
doubted that, in their transcription, all the liabilities to 
error which affected the transcription of the inspired 
autographs would not only exist, but would exist in 



90 First Step in Classification. 

even greater force. No such profound reverence was 
entertained for them as for Scripture, It was no such 
labour of earnest and loving zeal to copy them, with all 
those marks of interest which still testify to the anxiety 
manifested by the copyists of the Sacred Books to do their 
work faithfully and well. No such scruples would be 
felt by a copyist in altering the text that was beneath 
his eye. Nay, there is every reason to think that he 
would often be tempted by his very reverence for Scrip- 
ture to alter what he read. A quotation given by a 
Father, let us suppose, was different from what the tran- 
scriber found in the manuscripts he was himself accus- 
tomed to reverence as divine. How natural the supposi- 
tion that the Father had quoted wrong, and that justice, 
both to the Bible and to him, required that the error 
sholild be corrected. Add to this that, in the case of the 
Fathers, we possess, with one or two exceptions, no 
manuscripts reaching so near the time when their books 
were written as in the case of the New Testament, and 
that even the whole amount of our manuscripts of their 
writings is but small, and it will be at once observed 
that, if it be difficult to determine the text of Scripture, 
it must often be still more difficult to determine that of 
those Fathers, the earlv era of whose life renders their 
testimony in this matter of peculiar value. 

This however is not all. Even supposing that we 
could determine exactly what an early Christian Father 
gave as a citation from Scripture, the question would 
still remain, Has Scripture in that citation been ade- 
quately represented ? In very many cases it would be 



First Step in Classification. 9 

impossible to affirm this with confidence. The Fathers 
were not unfrequently extremely loose in their quota- 
tions from Scripture. Whether it was that they pos- 
sessed little critical skill and so were careless ; or that 
they found it difficult to turn up the passage they were 
quoting in the rolls which were then in use ; or that, 
depending largely on a still living tradition, they were 
less particular about written words than we are ; what- 
ever may have been the cause — and probably all the 
causes now mentioned tended more or less to the result 
— they were often satisfied if they gave the meaning of 
a passage without seeming to concern themselves 
whether or not they quoted with literal exactness. Nay, 
the same Father is found to quote the same text in dif- 
ferent ways in different parts of his writings. Numerous 
examples of this may be met with in any critical edition 
of the New Testament. We refer only to one. It is a 
question of very great importance whether in Mark i. 2 
we should read " as it is written in the prophets," or 
" as it is written in Isaiah the prophet," and the evidence 
of Irenaeus, a writer of the second half of the second 
century, would be here of peculiar value. That Father 
quotes the text at one time in the one form, at another 
in the other. 

The value of patristic citations is indeed sometimes 
very high. It may happen that New Testament passages 
are cited with the express intention of giving the words 
of the original, that the whole course of the writer's 
argument may be dependent on the fact that he found a 
particular word in the text before him, or that he may 



92 First Step in Classification, 

even discuss the merits of different readings, and de- 
liberately give the preference to one. In such cases the 
value of citations is so great that they become to a large 
degree, in a manner to be afterwards considered by 
us, tests of the value of those manuscripts in which 
similar or different readings occur. But this is not their 
general character. Neither ought it to be forgotten that 
they may often be useful as corroborative authorities. 
The weight which they have not of themselves they may 
receive from their agreement with other witnesses ; and, 
agreeing with them, they may confirm their evidence. 
It must be obvious, however, from all that has been said, 
that the highest position that can be assigned to cita- 
tions in general is that of being subsidiary aids in 
fixing the true reading of disputed passages. First 
authorities they are not. Our circle is narrower than 
it was. 

2. As to versions, or translations of the Greek text 
into other languages, their value in bearing testimony to 
the general purity and integrity of the form in which 
the New Testament has come down to us cannot be too 
highly spoken of; nor is it possible to admire too much 
the providential arrangement which led to the Bible's 
being early translated into many different tongues, so 
that its corruption, to any large extent, became almost, if 
not altogether, an impossibility. That, however, is not 
the point with which we are at present dealing. We 
desire to know what is the relation of versions to 
manuscripts in fixing particular words or clauses of the 
Greek text. It cannot be doubted for a moment that, 



First Step in Classification. 93 

just as in the case of citations, their position is sub- 
ordinate. 

At once the old difficulty meets us. What is the true 
text of the version itself? Exposed in its early con- 
dition to all the mischances that befell the sacred text, 
the recovery of the original text of the one may be a 
problem hardly less difficult of solution than the re- 
covery of the original text of the other ; while, in 
addition to a deterioration arising from the unavoidable 
infirmities of copyists, we are exposed to the highly 
probable danger that the transcriber of a version would 
often be tempted to correct it by the authority of the 
Greek text that he possessed. Again, even supposing 
that we have the version in its original condition, it 
may be that it is in a language widely different in its 
genius from the Greek ; that a translator was anxious 
to be elegant rather than accurate ; that, even if desirous 
to be accurate, he mistook the sense of the words that 
he translated. 

On the other hand, it must not be forgotten that there 
are some points in regard to which the evidence of 
versions is entitled to the greatest weight. The pre- 
sence or absence of whole clauses, for example, is a 
point to which they can clearly testify. It not un- 
frequently happened that they were made with such an 
excessive literalness that, disregarding the idiom of their 
own tongue, they followed the order and construction of 
the words in their original, or simply transferred Greek 
words to their own page in the letters used by them- 
selves. In such cases their bearing on any question at 



94 First Step in Classification. 

issue is direct. We have versions too belonging to parts 
of the world widely removed from one another, so that 
collusion of testimony was impossible. Finally, it 
greatly heightens our sense of their importance, when we 
remember that some of them were made at an a^e Ions: 
anterior to the date of our oldest manuscripts. Not- 
withstanding this, however, it must be evident that the 
use of versions in the critical emendation of the text is 
encompassed with difficulties peculiarly its owm. Ver- 
sions may preserve a true reading long before it has 
been discovered in any Greek manuscript, as the 
Vulgate preserved the fine reading of Luke ii. 14, " Glory 
to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men of 
His good pleasure," that is, among men whom He hath 
loved. They may be a powerful aid in settling dis- 
puted texts ; but they cannot be depended on as first 
authorities. Our circle has again been narrowed. 

We are thus for first authorities thrown back upon 
manuscripts of the Greek text itself, upon documents 
professing to give us directly that text as it stood in 
the infancy of the Christian Church. Other readings 
than those presented there we may find in patristic 
citations, or we may infer from versions; but the 
instances must be rare indeed, if they are even in any 
case to be regarded as legitimate, when we draw a read- 
ing from any other source than a Greek manuscript. 




CHAPTEE III. 

SECOND STEP IN CLASSIFICATION. 

IT the point now reached we have only 
manuscripts before us as the primal source 
whence the readings of the Greek New 
Testament are to be drawn. Not that we 
have laid citations and versions entirely aside. We 
shall have by and by to return to them when the 
whole evidence in any particular case is to be taken 
into account. But, in the meantime, while engaged in 
classifying our witnesses, we have seen reason to 
believe that they do not occupy the first rank. Greek 
manuscripts alone do that. These, however, are ex- 
tremely numerous, and it is quite possible that they 
may not all be of the same value. Can anything be 
done then towards classifying them ? 

In endeavouring to answer this question, it is of 
importance to bear distinctly in mind what it is that 
we are in search of. It is the original, and therefore the 
most ancient text. It might seem, therefore, at first 
sight that the nearer any manuscripts approach to it 
in date, the more valuable will they be; and that, 



96 Second Step in Classification. 

inasmuch as the uncial manuscripts, whose distinction 
from the cursive is already known to our readers, are 
our oldest group, we should be justified in at once 
placing our dependence mainly upon them. Here, 
however, we are met by the important fact that there is 
a very great difference between the oldness of a manu- 
script and the oldness of its text. The mechanical act 
of writing, and the substance of what is written, may 
belong to very different dates. It would not be so were 
we dealing only with original compositions. An ori- 
ginal book belongs in substance as well as form to the 
exact period at which its author lived and wrote, If we 
know the date of the form, we know also that of the 
substance. But we are now occupied, not with originals 
but with copies, and other considerations play their part. 
A cursive manuscript written, for example, in the 
eleventh century, may quite well present to us a text 
belonging to the fourth, or perhaps even an earlier cen- 
tury. It might be one of the manuscripts of that 
century, now lost, from which it was copied. Whether 
it was so is to be determined by considerations of which 
we have not yet spoken; but if there be good ground 
for believing that it was so, it is clear that it is not to 
have its value diminished by the unimportant circum- 
stance that it is written in cursive, not in uncial, letters. 
No doubt if a witness present himself to us in uncial 
clothing, we have for the most part, though not even 
then always, reason to believe both that he is old and 
that his text is old; whereas, in the case of one who 
appears in cursive clothing, it is a matter for inquiry 



Second Step in Classification. 97 

whether, though the fashion of his garb be modern, the 
substance of the garb, in other words the text itself, 
may not be as old as in the former case. Still the out- 
ward appearance of the witness is not decisive. We 
must dismiss the idea that the style in which a manu- 
script is written is conclusive either as to its value or 
its worthlessness. 

Have we then any means of classifying our witnesses 
upon the principle of more or less ancientness of text ? 
A little consideration of the matter will show us that we 
have ; and, when we have done it, a second step in 
classification will have been gained. 

In the first place, we can separate our most ancient 
uncial manuscripts from the rest, and determine 
from them the general character of an ancient text. 
What is in them testifies to the state of the text in 
their day, and must be old simply because they are old. 
We can then institute a comparison between this text 
and that of our more modern manuscripts. If, in doing 
so, it can be shown that there is a very great resem- 
blance, and that the various readings presented, not- 
withstanding this resemblance, by the moderns, can 
only be accounted for by the supposition that they ex- 
isted in the Church at a very early period, and that they 
have no connection w T ith the mere flux of time and its 
changes, we at once pronounce these modern manuscripts 
to be old in text though not in lettering. If, on the 
other hand, the differences are obviously produced, not 
by the faithful handing down of other ancient readings, 
but by that gradual process of change, sometimes more 

G 



98 Second Step in Classification. 

sometimes less conscious, which is inseparable from re- 
peated copyings, especially where the copyists differ in 
training and taste, we must regard the manuscripts con- 
taining these differences as modern, not only in form but 
in text. Now it is often possible to trace differences of 
this latter class. We can almost see the process of 
change going on, alterations finding their way into the 
text, roughnesses softened down, difficulties cleared 
away, anomalous turns of language removed, the whole 
character of the text becoming different from what it 
was. Wherever this can be done, we have gained the 
line of demarcation we are in search of. We are en- 
titled to say that manuscripts upon which such changes 
have been produced are not so worthy of reliance as 
those by which the changes have been escaped. 

In the second place, we can go even further than has 
now been said, and can determine with still greater pre- 
cision whether the text of any manuscript before us, be 
it uncial or cursive, is ancient or not. We know from 
entirely independent testimony, of a kind to be more 
fully spoken of when we reach our next point, how 
certain passages of Scripture were read in ancient times. 
By these we can test our witnesses. One comes before 
us with all the appearance of antiquity. We ask him, 
How do you read such and such passages ? If he answer 
us as, by the supposition, we know that they were read 
in ancient times ; well. It is so far at least a proof that 
he is what he claims to be. But if he answer us as we 
know that they were read only in modern not in ancient 
times, we at once say, You do not sustain your profes- 



Second Step in Classification. 99 

sion; you look as if you belonged to the Fathers; in 
reality, you are one of their late descendants. Again, 
one comes before us with all the appearance of being a 
modern. We apply the same test. He may show that, 
so far as our main purpose is concerned, he belongs to a 
remote antiquity. 

In the third place, such a separation as that of which 
we have been speaking has actually been made in 
certain cases with the consent of all. Inquirers differ 
as to the value they attach to the classes thus separated 
from each other. They do not deny that the classes 
exist. There are modern manuscripts which all allow 
to possess an ancient text, and to be in this respect dis- 
tinguished from the great mass of their fellows. 

It is no doubt possible that even manuscripts, not 
exhibiting what may be called an ancient text upon the 
whole, may occasionally preserve an apostolic word or 
phrase that somehow or other has dropped out of their 
more ancient companions. That they have preserved 
much that is apostolic is obvious, for in much all our 
witnesses agree, and that must be apostolic. They may 
therefore have preserved more. The difficulty is to 
make sure that they have done so. JsTo agreement 
among themselves can be sufficient to convince us, for 
they may have been led astray by some common cause. 
No mere number witnessing the same thing can be of 
the least avail. Unless we are satisfied that each indi- 
vidual of the number would be a good witness though 
he stood alone, the mere bringing them together as a 
multitude may disturb, but cannot convince. They 



100 Second Step in Classification. 

must prove their title to be heard ; and appearances 
being certainly against them, inasmuch as they differ 
from our older witnesses, we are entitled to ask that the 
proof they offer us shall be unambiguous and weighty. 

Thus then we have taken another step, and one most 
fruitful of results. It is a demonstrated fact, that the 
great mass of manuscripts belonging to the later centuries 
of the Christian Church cannot stand the tests of which 
we have been speaking. We shall not say that they 
are therefore to be put wholly aside, but certainly they 
are not primary authorities. Our circle has again been 
greatly narrowed. 




CHAPTEE IV. 

THIRD STEP IN CLASSIFICATION. — PART I. 

|T the process of classification hitherto pursued 
we have been enabled to diminish greatly 
the number of our primary witnesses to the 
Greek text of the New Testament. "We 
have also been able to secure that all those to whose 
evidence we are chiefly to attend have an ancient text, 
a text at least ancient in its general character. It may 
be thought that this should be enough for us ; but it 
must be borne in mind that the oldest of our manuscripts 
does not go back to a point of time older than the first 
half of the fourth century, and that the texts therefore 
hitherto mainly used by us take us only to that date, a 
date three centuries later than that at which the sacred 
autographs were written. This indeed would be a 
matter of no consequence if two conditions affecting the 
question before us could be fulfilled. First, had we 
reason to believe that, up to the period to which our 
oldest manuscripts belong, the text of the New Testa- 
ment had remained pure and free from error, then those 
witnesses, bearing testimony to its condition in their 



102 Third Step in Classification, 

own day, would at the same time testify to what it was 
in the days of the Apostles. Secondly, were our wit- 
nesses agreed in their testimony, we should at once and 
without further difficulty be able to determine the pre- 
cise words that were read by them as Scripture, and a 
very strong presumption would be given in their behalf. 
Unfortunately neither of these two conditions is com- 
plied with. 

As to the first, we know that the text of the New 
Testament, so far from having continued pure during 
the first three centuries of its existence, had fallen into 
a state of remarkable confusion long before that period 
expired. Several circumstances combine to show this. 
The differences among our ancient witnesses themselves, 
a point as yet only alluded to, and to be immediately 
spoken of more fully, are a clear proof of the fact. Had 
the text been preserved in its original condition they 
could not all at once have exhibited the diversity that 
we actually meet with. It was one at the first; it 
would have been one then. Again, although we have 
no manuscripts older than the early part of the fourth 
century, we have translations of the New Testament 
made into other languages nearly two centuries earlier, 
together with quotations from it embodied in writings 
of the Fathers belonging to as remote an age ; and these 
translations and quotations leave no doubt that, when 
they were made, very many passages were read in their 
particular districts quite otherwise than we find them in 
our oldest manuscripts. Still further, we can see from 
the works of the early Fathers of the Church that they 



Third Step in Classification. 103 

were often greatly perplexed by the variety of readings 
that came under their notice. They speak of it con- 
tinually, and often in tones of much hesitation and 
doubt. They refer to manuscripts even then older than 
others. They describe some manuscripts as being more 
accurate than others. They blame opponents for wil- 
fully falsifying the text. They discuss the probabilities 
of different claims. In short, they find themselves 
largely compelled to pursue the same course of argu- 
ment pursued by Biblical critics at the present day. 
Finally, we have the express testimony of some of the 
most learned of their number, of some who devoted 
much pains to the study of the text upon this very 
point. We shall refer only to two, the most learned, the 
most critical of them all, one of whom flourished in the 
third century, the other in the fourth. The first, Origen, 
commenting upon Matt. xix. 19, where words occur 
falsely thought by him to be corrupt, says, " It might 
appear madness in me to consider these words as an 
addition to the text, were there not also in many other 
things such a variety in the copies of the Gospels, that 
neither do those of Matthew correspond with one 
another nor with those of the other Evangelists. But 
now the diversity of copies is become truly great, 
whether through the carelessness of the copyists or 
through the wilful daring of those who are occupied in 
correcting what is copied, or through those again who 
venture to make improvements upon their own judg- 
ment, sometimes adding, and at other times blotting 
out." The second, Jerome, says, in his epistle to Pope 



104 Third Step in Classification. 

Daniasus, " If confidence is to be placed in the Latin 
texts, let them tell us in which ; for the texts are almost 
as numerous as the copies/' It is true that Jerome is 
here speaking of the Latin texts, but the simple fact 
that they were thus corrupt is evidence enough that the 
variations in different manuscripts of the original must 
have been great. 

To w^hat causes this corruption of the text about the 
beginning of the fourth century is to be ascribed it 
would be extremely difficult to say. The natural, the 
inevitable causes spoken of in the former part of this 
work, undoubtedly contributed to it, but they are not of 
themselves, by any means, a sufficient explanation, The 
fact, however, without going into this, is sufficient for 
our present purpose. It evidently presents a very 
serious difficulty when we would proceed to estimate 
the merits of our ancient witnesses who belong to that 



■*& 



The second difficulty alluded to is not less great. 
"When we examine our ancient witnesses, we find that 
they are very far indeed from being unanimous in the 
testimony given by them. They are constantly at 
variance with one another. We take one or two of 
them that seem to approach most closely; and for a 
time, as we travel with them, we find nothing but a 
delightful harmony of statement. All at once they 
diverge. First the one and then the other joins a 
different group. But attachment to the new companions 
does not continue long. Divergence from them speedily 
appears. And so they go on in ever- varying combina- 



Third Step in Classification. 105 

tions, till the impression is apt to be produced on us 
that anything like a well-grounded verdict on our part 
is impossible. 

And so it would be, were all our ancient authorities 
regarded by us as equally worthy of reliance. But 
there cannot be a greater mistake than to think so. 
Two manuscripts of the fourth .century may differ from 
each other in worth quite as much as two of the 
sixteenth. All the main causes that operate in bringing 
about a distinction in the latter operate also in the 
former case. The old were copies like the young. They 
may have been copied from bad originals. They may 
have been carelessly copied. Age alone cannot be 
accepted as decisive of their value. It will thus be seen 
that we are brought back to the point from which we 
started in this chapter. The two conditions that would 
have saved us from any effort to discriminate between 
our ancient witnesses cannot be complied with. Nothing 
remains but that we make up our minds as to their 
relative value, and the weight to be attached to them. 

Here one of the most interesting and important pro- 
blems connected with our inquiry opens on our view. 
How shall we decide between the conflicting claims 
of manuscripts all presenting so far at least an ancient 
text ? We shall explain the principle of the process to 
be resorted to, and shall then confirm and illustrate it in 
a separate chapter by one or two examples. 

The great fact to be borne in mind is this, that we 
have in early versions of the New Testament, and 
especially in early quotations from it in the writings of 



106 Third Step in Classification. 

the Church Fathers, evidence as to the manner in which 
a large number of important texts were read at a date 
much more remote than that of the oldest of our exist- 
ing manuscripts. It is true that this evidence is not 
free from the influences that have weakened the effect 
of the evidence of our manuscripts themselves. The 
text of translations and of quotations has been affected 
by time as well as their text. The editions of them 
that have been published are not unfrequently far from 
being so critical and correct as to entitle them to be 
confidently relied on. We may often be as uncertain as 
to the readings they presented at the time when the 
manuscripts containing them appeared, for they too 
were once known only in that form, as we are with 
regard to the readings we would deduce from the 
manuscripts of the New Testament itself. Still, after 
making all allowance for these chances of error, a 
sufficient amount of certainty remains to enable us to 
come to a definite conclusion as to the manner in which 
a large number of important texts w T ere read, at a 
date long anterior to that from which any manuscript 
evidence has come down to us. But we are not confined 
to the sources now referred to for the certainty of which 
we speak. Other considerations come also into play. 
Arguments as to the original reading of the texts we are 
selecting may be drawn from the general verdict of 
manuscript authority regarding them; for although that 
authority is later than the evidence of early versions 
and quotations, it may often carry us back, by way 
of confirmation, to what these testify. Internal evidence 



Third Step in Classification. 107 

too, springing from such, things as the context of the 
passage, the style of the writer, or the analogy of Scrip- 
ture, may be taken into account. Each of these has some 
weight, and forms a legitimate part of the proof by 
which we settle with ourselves the manner in which the 
texts we have fixed on were read in the first or second 
century, if not at the very first. "We establish these 
readings then ; and pursuing the same course as that 
already indicated in the last chapter, only now with 
much greater minuteness and particularity than were 
then necessary, we test by means of them the value of 
each of the ancient manuscripts in our hands. If it 
contain them in the form we expect it is a proof that it 
is good. If it do not contain them in that form we con- 
clude that it is of inferior value. 

It will be at once seen that the principle now ad- 
vocated is thoroughly sound, and that, not only in so 
far as it applies to the reading of the particular texts 
that have been under examination, but in relation to the 
general value of each of our manuscripts as a whole. 
Upon the first of these two points there can be no 
doubt. We used all available evidence in settling the 
reading of our characteristic texts, and the judgment 
of the single manuscript we are examining will, if it 
dissent from that evidence, not disturb, if it agree with 
it, will confirm our conclusion. But the second point 
is equally indisputable ; for surely it will not be denied 
that proved value in regard to a number of texts, and 
these characteristic and important ones, is a fair test of 
the value of a manuscript in general. Proved veracity 



108 Third Step in Classification. 

in a witness upon many points is a reason why we 
should not only believe him upon these points, but why 
we should accept him as a generally credible witness. 
Let us refuse to acknowledge this, and a fundamental 
law of evidence is overthrown. 



CHAPTER V. 

THIRD STEP IN CLASSIFICATION. — PART II. 




E have explained the principle by which the 
relative value of ancient manuscripts, all 
possessing great claims on our regard, is to 
be tested, and we proceed now to give one 
or two illustrations of the process. 

Let us take first a test to which reference has been 
already made, Matt. vi. 4, " And thy Father, which seeth 
in secret, shall reward thee openly." The word "openly" 
is found in several ancient manuscripts, but it is 
omitted in three of the most ancient. It is evidently 
necessary that we should know whether the former or 
the latter are most worthy of our confidence before we 
venture to decide between them. Now in connection 
with this text it happens that we have the means of 
doing so. One of the most celebrated of the Fathers 
directed his particular attention to the question whether 
the word " openly " should stand in the text or not, and at 
last excluded it on the ground that, though found in 
many Latin translations of his day, it was not found in 
the Greek manuscripts, which were earlier in date. 



110 Third Step in Classification. 

This testimony is very strong. We turn to the most 
ancient Greek manuscripts that have come down to us, 
and the word is not found in them. It is also wanting 
in two or three important translations, and in citations 
of the text given by several of the Fathers. Farther, as 
already pointed out in a previous chapter, the insertion 
of the word mars the sense of the passage, and leads to 
a different idea from that which our Lord evidently 
intended to convey. In these circumstances it is an 
easy conclusion from the evidence that " openly " ought 
to be omitted. That, however, is not what we have 
at present in view. We rather lay aside one of the 
ancient manuscripts testifying to the omission. Our 
verdict on this point will not be affected. There is abun- 
dant evidence without it. We determine fully that the 
omission should be made. We then take up the old 
manuscript laid aside, and as yet supposed to be unex- 
amined. Has it, or has it not, the word ? It wants it. 
Thus we have a proof so far, though one text will of 
course go but a little way in such an inquiry, that that 
manuscript is right, and more worthy of being relied on 
than any manuscript, even though an ancient one, in 
which the word occurs. 

Again, we take another very interesting text, Matt, 
v. 22. The reading of our English Bibles is, " But I 
say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother 
without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment." 
Now we know from the express testimony of the two 
most celebrated critical Fathers of the Early Church, 
that the words " without a cause" were not found in the 



Third Step in Classification. Ill 

best manuscripts then existing, and that in their opinion, 
therefore, they ought to be excluded. " In some manu- 
scripts/' says one of them, '"without a cause' is added; 
but, in the true ones, the sentence is made quite ex- 
clusive, and anger is completely taken away. 'Without 
a cause,' therefore, ought to be banished from the text." 
"But some think," says the other, "that we may be 
angry reasonably, improperly adding 'without a cause' 
to what we find in the Gospel, according as it is said, 
'whosoever is angry with his brother shall be in danger 
of the judgment,' for some read ' whosoever is angry 
with his brother without a cause.'" As before, this 
testimony that the phrase should be omitted is very 
strong. With all their varied learning and great oppor- 
tunities, these Fathers had considered the matter, and 
come to a clear and unhesitating decision. The phrase 
is also wanting in two of our oldest manuscripts, in 
several valuable translations, and in others of the 
Fathers besides the two now cited. Internal evidence is 
also against it. So soon as we have reason to doubt the 
propriety of its presence, we see that it has all the 
appearance of a word inserted to avoid the apparent 
harshness of the precept without it ; while, if it was an 
original portion of Scripture, it is very difficult to give 
satisfactory reasons for the removal, the difficulty of the 
passage being thereby unquestionably increased. On 
the other hand, the precept, if we omit the phrase, is in 
striking harmony with the at first sight sharp, extreme, 
almost paradoxical character of various other precepts of 
the Sermon on the Mount. Although, therefore, we do 



112 Third Step in Classification. 

find the phrase in a good many uncials, including in 
this case one of the oldest, in the great mass of cursives, 
in several versions and Fathers, it is not difficult to 
decide that it ought to go out of the text. As before, 
however, that is not what we have at present in view. 
"We rather lay aside one of the ancient manuscripts 
testifying to the omission, if possible, and.it is here pos- 
sible, the same one as before. Our verdict on the point of 
omission will not be affected. There is abundant evi- 
dence without it. We determine fully that the omission 
should be made. We then take up the old manuscript 
laid aside, and as yet supposed to be unexamined, has it, 
or has it not, the words (one word in Greek) ? It wants 
them. Thus we have again so far a proof that that 
manuscript is right, and worthy of being relied on. 

"We take still another text from the Gospel of St. Mat- 
thew, xxviii. 9, " And as they went to tell His disciples, 
behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came 
and held Him by the feet, and worshipped Him." The 
words here, " as they went to tell His disciples," are found 
in some uncial manuscripts, but not in others. We desire 
to know upon which of these we may most rely. We 
pursue therefore exactly the same process as before. 
Several of the Fathers bear distinct witness to the fact 
that these words should not be there, and so do two of 
our most ancient manuscripts (the one that we are 
testing being in the meanwhile laid aside), together with 
many other important authorities. So far therefore as 
that point is concerned we can without difficulty come 
to a conclusion. The words have no right to their 



Third Step in Classification. 113 

position in the text. We turn up the manuscript under 
examination. Does it have, or does it want, them ? It 
wants them. The conclusion as to its trustworthiness 
drawn in the two previous instances must be drawn 
again. 

Once more, we take a very interesting passage from 
the Gospel of St. John, vi. 11. It occurs in the account 
given by that Apostle of the multiplying of the bread, 
" And Jesus took the loaves ; and when He had given 
thanks, He distributed to the disciples, and the disciples 
to them that were set down." Such is the reading of 
some of our authorities ; but others, omitting a portion 
of the sentence, read, " And Jesus took the loaves, and 
when He had given thanks, He distributed to them that 
were set down." The difference, it will be observed, is 
that, according to the latter reading, Jesus directly dis- 
tributes the bread Himself; that, according to the former, 
He does it by means of His disciples. Now we find that 
all the most important versions, and all the most trust- 
worthy Fathers who allude to the verse, so decidedly 
support the first of these two views, that we can have 
no hesitation in adopting it. The verse ought to read, 
" He distributed to them that were set down." We 
return to the particular manuscript we are testing. 
How does the case stand with it ? It wants the words ; 
and we have fresh confirmation of its value. 

One other example taken from the Epistles may fitly 
close this list. We take 1 Cor. vi. 20, " Therefore glorify 
God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's." 
We can establish wuthout the use of the manuscript 

H 



114 Third Step in Classification. 

with which we are dealing, that all the words here met 
with after " body " have no right to a place in the text, 
which ought to read simply, " therefore glorify God in 
your body." We turn to our manuscript as before. It 
wants the words, and we are strengthened in our old 
conclusion. 

The same process has to be applied to each of our 
ancient manuscripts in succession, testing each by the 
mode in which it reads texts whose true reading we have 
been able to ascertain without it. In proportion as it 
agrees with them its value is enhanced ; in proportion 
as it differs from them it is diminished. In the five 
texts now selected one manuscript was found to stand 
the test of each. It is certainly more valuable, so far as 
five texts can help us to a conclusion, than one that could 
stand the test only twice, or thrice, or not at all. 

The illustrations now given ought sufficiently to ex- 
plain the general nature of the method resorted to for 
the purpose of determining the point that we have had 
before us, How we are to arrange and classify those an- 
cient manuscripts that unfortunately so often differ from 
one another. Our illustrations convey of course no idea 
of the very large number of texts to which the process must 
be applied, or of the complications that have often to be 
met before a final decision can be come to. Yet enough 
ought to have been said to show that, when critics of the 
text of Scripture make an alteration in the standard text 
they do not make it at random. They know what they are 
about. By long, laborious, anxious study they have been 
able to establish certain principles by which they can 



Third Step in Classification. 115 

• 
decide as to the character of the witnesses "before them; 

and they are thus prepared for giving their verdict upon 
the whole case in the calm judicial spirit of a judge upon 
the bench. 

The effect also of the procedure now advocated upon 
the mass of our materials for judging of the true text of 
the Xew Testament will be at once apparent. It is a 
fact admitting of no contradiction, that the number even 
of our ancient manuscripts capable of standing well the 
test of which we have been speaking is but small. We 
have to add to them indeed those of our modern manu- 
scripts that pass with equal credit through the trial, for 
we have already seen that in such an event the modern 
manuscript is, as having an ancient text, to be ranked 
for our purpose along with the ancients themselves. 
Again, however, this number is not great. Both ancients 
and moderns together, able to vindicate their right to 
occupy the highest place in the list of tested manuscripts, 
are but few in number. Our circle of primary authorities 
has been still more narrowed. 



CHAPTEE VI. 

GENERAL RESULT OF CLASSIFICATION. 

^^^SEFOEE proceeding further, it will be well for 
|j^*|^! us to pause for a moment, and to consider 
lijsfjjl the result that we have reached. We have 
been endeavouring so to classify our wit- 
nesses to the text of the New Testament that we may- 
distinguish their various merits, not putting any of them 
absolutely aside, but arranging them according to what 
seem their different degrees of credibility. We have 
been doing this too with the view of narrowing, if pos- 
sible, our circle of primary authorities, so that we 
may not lose ourselves in what would otherwise be a 
labyrinth of confusion, through whose windings we have 
no clue to guide us. We have seen that versions and 
quotations are less valuable than manuscripts of the text; 
that manuscripts possessing an ancient text have a 
greater claim on our attention than those whose text is 
comparatively modern ; although if a modern manu- 
script possess, as some of them actually do, an ancient 
type of text, the mere fact of its being modern in form 
does not detract from its value. Eor the purpose that 



General Result of Classification. 117 

we have in hand it is really ancient, and must take its 
place along with those that are so both in form and in 
substance. We have also seen that we are in possession 
of a principle by which we can determine that certain 
even of the ancients are better witnesses than others, 
because they have preserved for us readings that we 
have independent authority for believing to have existed 
at the nearest date to the time of the Apostles, as to 
which Ave have any evidence at all. 

The result of the principles now advocated is so 
important, and at the same time so unexpected, that it is 
necessary to pause over it for a moment, and to see 
whether, in the presence of that result, we are prepared 
to abide by our conclusion. The result is that, notwith- 
standing the enormous mass of evidence that we have in 
our hands as to the text of the Xew Testament, our 
primary authorities are reduced to a very small number. 
It is an admitted fact, in particular with regard to 
manuscripts on which, as Ave have seen, our dependence 
is mainly to be placed, that by far the larger part of them 
do present a text differing to no inconsiderable degree 
from that found in the few to which we have urged that 
a decided preference should be given. 

Formidable objection is therefore taken to this result. 
It is pleaded that the resolution to follow it up in the 
actual construction of the text is unfair to the great 
numerical preponderance of witnesses on the other side. 
It is conceded that character, not number, should prevail ; 
but the number against our few is, in the present instance, 
so very considerable that it is supposed to require a 



118 General Result of Classification. 

certain modification of a principle usually sound. There 
is against us a unanimity so extensive and so long 
continued that, when it is described even in language 
against which no charge of exaggeration can be brought, 
it is apt to leave an almost ineffaceable impression on 
many a mind that we ought to defer to it more than we 
have done. 

If we reflect upon the matter for an instant we shall 
see that the idea thus entertained is distinctly to be 
repudiated. It is true that our witnesses stand by 
hundreds on the one side ; by tens, or rather units, on 
the other. If then we have reason to believe that the 
former are as good as the latter, their evidence will 
probably be, as surely it ought to be, conclusive. 
Numbers, in such a case, it would be entirely out of the 
question to disregard. But it can hardly be said that 
the presence of numbers, however great, makes us 
independent of investigating quality. In no inquiry 
that we can engage in is the character of a witness 
exposed to so many deteriorating influences as here. 
We must satisfy ourselves therefore whether each, as he 
comes before us, has suffered in this way or not. The 
mere assertion of any individual among them taken by 
itself is nothing, and multiply nothing by hundreds we 
have still nothing. 

It may be urged indeed that we are entitled to speak 
in this way only on condition that we can show that 
this majority of our witnesses have no independent 
character, that they gathered their information from the 
few, that they corrupted it in the process, and that we 



General Result of Classification. 119 

can learn all we wish to know from the lips of those to 
whom they in the first instance deferred. No obligation 
lies on us to show anything of the kind. We are by no 
means called upon to prove that these witnesses, who 
come to us in crowds, derived their information from the 
small number to whom we are disposed to attach 
supreme importance. Their value as witnesses may 
have been affected by many other circumstances besides 
that. There may have been collusion among them. 
Without deliberate collusion they may have been led, 
under the pressure of the same powerful authority, to 
the same utterances. They may have all sprung from 
some one region of the world in which, owing to peculiar 
circumstances, some one, and that an imperfect, form of 
the text had gained supremacy. These things are at least 
possible. Whether they have actually happened or not 
demands inquiry. We are entitled to say that the credi- 
bility of all our witnesses must be tried by tests which 
every judge applies. If they stand the test they must be 
listened to, but escape it they cannot. 

It is a matter of no weight whatever then in the present 
question that it so happens that, by the process we have 
been pursuing, the great majority of our manuscripts 
have ultimately to rank lower than the few. The textual 
critic is not to blame that it should be so. When he 
begins his labours he has no preference for an ancient 
over a modern, or for one ancient over another. His 
first impression would probably be rather in favour of 
the great majority of modern manuscripts. He has 
been accustomed to the readings which they supply. 



120 General Result of Classification. 

He finds them easier, smoother, less perplexing in the 
forms and constructions of their words. But the 
determination of the text of the New Testament is far 
too important, far too sacred a thing, to permit him to 
rest in. what is familiar and easy. He must ascertain to 
the best of his ability what is true. Therefore it is that 
he is bound to test the value of every witness who 
comes before him, of all the evidence that is offered 
him. Whatever his own predilections might be he 
must follow the course suggested by reason and 
experience as legitimate, knowing well that, though the 
result may not be what he himself would wish, " the 
foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness 
of God is stronger than men." 




CHAPTEE VII. 

THE PRINCIPLE OF GROUPING. 

JP to the point now reached by us we have 
been speaking almost wholly of manuscripts 
of the Greek ~New Testament, those witnesses 
to which we saw, at the outset of our in- 
quiries, that we must mainly defer. We have found that 
we can classify them, and that we can thus introduce 
order where at first there seemed to be nothing but con- 
fusion. Have we then now simply to arrange these 
manuscripts upon the plan laid down, and to take from 
the best of them the text that they contain ? It would 
be so were they the only authorities with which w r e have 
to deal, and did the path by which they lead us carry 
us back as far as the time when the sacred autographs 
were penned. But neither of these is the case. We 
have already seen that we have translations of the New 
Testament and quotations from it in the writings of the 
Fathers more ancient than any manuscript possessed by 
us ; and we have seen also that at the point at which 
our manuscripts stop we are not only three centuries 
from the age of the Apostles, but that between us and 



122 TJie Principle of Grouping. 

them there lies a period when there was no small con- 
fusion of the text. Nothing remains for us, therefore, 
except to recall our other witnesses, that we may hear 
what they also have to say; for, although it is true 
that they are not primary authorities, they may not he 
neglected. Is not this, however, to re-introduce, at least 
to a large extent, the old confusion which we persuaded 
ourselves we had escaped ? At first sight it almost 
seems as if it were so. But the phenomenon is far too 
interesting, far too important, to permit us to be easily 
discouraged ; and we look about to see if there is nothing 
else to help us in estimating the value of our evidence 
when it is presented to us, not in one of its parts only, 
but in all its parts. 

We turn, then, again to the differences of readings that 
we have before us about the beginning of the fourth 
century, and we are met by the fact that groups of these 
differences appear to have been prevalent in some parts 
of the Christian world more than in others. There is 
by no means unmingled confusion, a total want of order 
in the varieties that exist ; but there is a certain 
method according to which the differences distribute 
themselves. Thus, for example, it is found that in 
Gaul, Italy, and Africa there is a type of variation 
seemingly different from that which prevails at Alex- 
andria or Constantinople; that at Constantinople there 
is a type of text bearing a marked resemblance to what 
was read by the Fathers who flourished at Antioch in 
Syria. The question immediately arises, Do the facts 
bear out the correctness of this impression ? If they 



TJie Principle of Grouping. 123 

do, it can hardly fail to have an important bearing on 
our inquiry, because it is clear that, given two contend- 
ing readings of a text, the one having the best claim on 
our acceptance will be the one which has maintained its 
place in the greatest number of districts, notwithstand- 
ing the tendency of these districts to introduce changes 
of their own. Its permanence amidst so much around 
it that was shifting shows its vitality and power; and 
even if it has not been accepted everywhere, the more 
widespread the diffusion, in other words, the greater the 
permanence, the greater the power. We must look 
then at this matter somewhat more closely. It may be 
described as the principle of grouping. 

Had the copies of the sacred autographs been con- 
fined to one district there would probably have been no 
scope for this, and no need to make any such attempt. 
The materials and the need of grouping both arise 
when these copies are taken into other lands, are tran- 
scribed there, and are dispersed, partly it may be in the 
original, but mainly in translations. The inhabitants of 
one country differ from those of another in thought, in 
taste, in manner of expression, in occasional choice of 
words, even when their language is the same. These 
differences are strengthened when a different language 
is spoken. The words of one tongue often fail to cover 
exactly the same field of thought as those of another ; 
and when we have to reason backwards from a Syriac, 
an Egyptian, or a Latin translation to a Greek sentence, 
it may well happen that we shall not always be led to 
precisely the same result. 



124 The Principle of Grouping. 

This, however, is not all. The circumstances amidst 
which the work of transcription is undertaken in dif- 
ferent countries also differ. In one there may be but 
a small demand, and the work may be gone about 
leisurely, slowly, and in a scholarly spirit. In another 
the demand may be much larger, and there may be 
greater haste and imperfection in its supply. There 
may be no bad faith. All may be done in the strictest 
honour, and with the most sincere desire to produce 
faithful copies or accurate translations of the original. 
The influences leading to change may work quite uncon- 
sciously in the minds of the transcribers or translators. 
The important fact is that they are there ; and that it is 
as impossible to be altogether free from them as it is for 
a succession of scribes in the same country to exhibit a 
perfect immunity from those errors of transcription, due 
to human frailty, that were formerly taken notice of and 
illustrated. The effect is obvious. In different districts 
of the world different groups of errors will become pre- 
valent, and the manuscripts, versions, or quotations con- 
taining the texts erroneously copied will present a cer- 
tain family resemblance to one another. Thus, for 
example, in John ii. 3, in the account of the miracle at 
Cana of Galilee, we read, " And when they wanted wine," 
or, as it might be more simply and literally translated, 
" And when wine failed, the mother of Jesus saith unto 
him, They have no wine." In several of our important 
authorities we find, instead of these words, the following, 
" And they had no wine, because the wine of the mar- 
riage feast was finished. Then'the mother of Jesus saith 



Tlie Principle of Grouping. 125 

unto him, They have no wine." We do not so much 
ask at present which of these two readings deserves the 
preference. We observe rather that the authority for 
the latter is, with the exception of one Greek manuscript, 
wholly Latin. It was mainly confined to those parts of 
the world where the Latin tongue was spoken. It had 
no hold either of the Syriac or the Greek East, 

It is not indeed to be thought that the grouping now 
referred to can be strictly carried through all our 
authorities as to the text of Scripture. We cannot 
definitely assign them all to particular families. Neither 
manuscripts nor translations were confined to any one 
region of the Church. They passed from country to 
country and from city to city through that interchange 
of letters, books, and visits which forms one of the 
most interesting characteristics of the early Christians. 
Mixed manuscripts thus came into existence — manu- 
scripts showing traces of different districts, and bridging 
over the gulf that would otherwise have separated them. 
Yet in very many cases the lines of demarcation are 
sufficiently distinct to entitle the critic to speak of dif- 
ferent styles of text corresponding to different regions 
of the Church. 

Let us proceed to the bearing of what has now been 
said. It is highly important in the following respects. 

1. In the first place, mere number of manuscripts 
belonging to any group is of comparatively little moment; 
because, whatever the number of such manuscripts, they 
mainly testify to the one manuscript the head of the 
local family from which they sprang, and that head of 



126 The Principle of Grouping. 

the family can only count as one. "Wherever, therefore, 
we have reason to think that we have a group of authori- 
ties, that group must count as one stream of evidence, 
without reference to the number of individuals of which 
it is composed. 

2. In the second place, the greater the number of 
streams of evidence flowing from different quarters of 
the world and testifying to the same reading, the more 
likely is that reading to be correct. This is something 
entirely different from the number of individual manu- 
scripts, of which one stream may exhibit many more 
than another. The evidence of all flowing in each stream 
is taken as a whole ; and then the more streams we have 
of the same character the greater the confidence with 
which we infer that the reading floating on their surface 
comes from the head fountain of the waters. It is clear 
that it must be so. How do we know that any reading 
is absolutely correct ? By the confluence of all our 
streams. " In the beginning was the Word, and the 
Word was with God, and the Word was God." What 
is it that assures us that this sublime opening of the 
Gospel of St. John really came from the pen of the be- 
loved disciple ? That it was everywhere and at all 
times read. In every region of the earth to which a 
manuscript of the Gospel was taken these words were 
copied from it exactly as they stand. Gaul, Italy, 
Africa, Alexandria, Palestine, Syria, Constantinople, all 
read them as we read them now. Many another text in 
the same Gospel underwent great and different changes. 
These words underwent none ; and the only possible ex- 



The Principle of Grouping. 127 

planation is, that they existed in the Apostle's auto- 
graph. The same principle leads to the just preference 
of two agreeing streams of evidence to one, for that 
agreement is a testimony to the fact that, at a date an- 
terior to the decay and corruption of the text, the reading 
given was more widely spread abroad than any other 
with which it has to contend. The only probable explan- 
ation again of this diffusion is that the reading came 
from the original, and possessed sufficient power to resist 
the influences that were producing change. 

Let us illustrate what has been said by a reading in 
John i. 51. There we find the Saviour saying, in our 
English version, " Verily, verily, I say unto you, Here- 
after," or rather, Frorn henceforth "ye shall see heaven 
opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending 
upon the Son of Man." The words " From henceforth " 
are found in one of the leading Greek manuscripts, in 
several other uncials, in the whole family of manuscripts 
of a later date, whose headquarters were the Byzantine 
Empire, in two Latin versions of a later type than the 
earliest, in the Syriac, and in two or three of the later 
Lathers. At the best, therefore, if read at all in early 
times, they w^ere read only in Syria, and in Constanti- 
nople, which w 7 as dependent upon it. On the other hand, 
the words are omitted in three of the oldest and most 
valuable Greek manuscripts, in all the best Latin ver- 
sions, in the version of Lower Egypt, in the Armenian 
and iEthiopic versions, and in some of the most valuable 
patristic writings that we possess. "We have thus one 
region of the Church alone against all the rest, and that 



128 The Principle of Grouping. 

the region where we know from other evidence that 
manuscripts underwent most change in the hands of 
hasty, if not imperfectly informed scribes. There can be 
no doubt that the reading of the verse without them is 
the true reading of what the Saviour said ; although, if 
number of individual manuscripts were to be considered, 
the majority in their favour would be overwhelming. It 
is worth while to observe that, in this case, we can dis- 
cover without much difficulty how the words in ques- 
tion got their way into the text. The scribe had in his 
mind the language of Jesus in Matt. xxvi. 64, "Jesus 
saith unto him, Thou hast said : nevertheless, I say unto 
you, Hereafter/' or as it should be, From henceforth "ye 
shall see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of 
power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." The two 
verses have a great similarity of tone. " From hence- 
forth'' was met with in the last and most familiar one ; it 
easily slipped into the first and less familiar. 

We add only, in conclusion, upon this point, that it 
does not matter, though, as in the example now given, 
all the individuals in each of the groups which har- 
monize upon the whole do not bear witness to what w^e 
accept as true. That so many of them do agree has to 
be accounted for, and the only explanation being that 
in each case they had drawn the reading from some 
common progenitor, the fact that these progenitors in 
different regions of the world had, at a much earlier date, 
borne the same testimony, is a presumption of the 
strongest kind that they correctly represent the one 
original. 



CHAPTER VIII 



DETERMINATION OF THE TEXT. — PART I. 




jjUR witnesses are now classified and grouped, 
and we have to turn to the interesting and 
important task, to which all that has been 
hitherto said has been preparatory, — the 
hearing of the evidence, and the determination, by means 
of it, of those words in which we are to find the light 
of life. 

At the point at which we stand it is to be observed, 
that we suppose ourselves to be absolutely ignorant of 
the words of the ISTew Testament. We are not in the 
position of one who has that volume in his hands, and 
who, having heard that the reading of some of its pas- 
sages is disputed, is about to examine a number of 
witnesses as to what they have to say upon that point. 
For more than two centuries after the Eeformation, 
indeed down to the third decade of the present century, 
this was the position of successive editors of the New 
Testament. The "Beceived Text," as it was called, had 
acquired such authority, that the utmost they ventured 
to attempt was to make such emendations upon it as 



130 Determination of the Text 

seemed to be required by the ever-increasing knowledge 
of manuscripts and other sources of evidence. The 
greatest advance made by any of them was to ask, Is 
there reason to depart from the ordinary reading, and, if 
there was, to make that departure without hesitation ? 
At the date, however, of which we have spoken, one of 
the most distinguished of the noble band of scholars 
who have devoted themselves to inquiries connected 
with our present subject, Professor Lachmann of Berlin, 
took another and decisive step. He started with the 
question, Is there any reason to depart, not from the 
Eeceived Text, but from the readings that are best 
established ? His predecessors might have shown their 
modesty by adopting no new reading they were unable 
to . defend. It escaped their notice, according to him, 
that it was unreasonable to admit any reading at all into 
the text, evidence of whose value they had not ob- 
tained. They, in short, had made the "Eeceived Text" 
their point of departure. He threw it wholly aside. 
He would gather his whole New Testament text from 
the original witnesses, and from them alone. 

This principle, undoubtedly just, is now universally 
accepted, and hence the interest and importance of the 
point that we have reached. From the witnesses whom 
we suppose to be before us, the whole text of our New 
Testament is to be gathered. 

In estimating the value of their evidence certain 
principles or rules of judging must be taken into account. 
They may be conveniently divided into External and 
Internal 



Determination of the Text 131 

I. Principles of External Evidence. 

1. The first and simplest principle by which we are 

to be guided is, that, where all our authorities agree, the 
evidence must be accepted as conclusive. It is needless 
to enlarge upon this principle, which can admit of no 
dispute. Depending upon these authorities alone for 
our text, we have obviously no alternative but to accept 
what they with one voice proclaim to be correct. So 
much of the New Testament is guaranteed to us upon 
this principle that the disputed parts form only an ex- 
ceedingly small portion of the whole. 

2. Witnesses thoroughly tested in the manner pre- 
viously explained are entitled to a hearing in every case 
equally respectful. It .may be true that an ancient 
manuscript possesses a certain advantage over a modern 

. one in that, having been less frequently copied, it has 
probably escaped some of the changes which the mere 
act of copying is certain to introduce. Wherever, there- 
fore, the departure of a recent manuscript from the read- 
ing of the older appears to be owing to frequency of 
transcription, the latter ought to be deferred to. But 
when the difference seems to have no connection with 
this source of error, when the variation is so distinct 
that it must be held to have belonged to the manuscript 
from which the more recent one was copied, it is impos- 
sible to allow that the greater age of an opponent shall 
alone decide the controversy in its favour. We have 
tested the one as well as the other by the tests with 
which we started as the best and most trustworthy that 



132 Determination of the Text. 

could be devised. The one as well as the other has 
stood the test, and is therefore not to be undervalued 
because it may be written in cursive rather than uncial 
letters, or may be marked by numerals rather than the 
capital letters of the alphabet. The principle of the rule 
is evidently indisputable, but it is not unnecessary to 
point out that it ought to be adhered to. Any one con- 
sulting the critical apparatus, the lists of authorities, 
found in a critical edition of the New Testament, will 
soon learn that he is in constant danger of ascribing 
undue weight to manuscripts that have only a higher 
antiquity or a more imposing notation than that of 
many others to commend them. 

3. In manuscripts thus tested the element of number 
is an important consideration. For it will be observed 
that we have not now number versus authority, the 
multitude against the " fit though few." By the sup- 
position all have been proved credible witnesses, and 
although even then there will be many minute circum- 
stances leading us to think one more credible than 
another, yet to put number out of view altogether were 
to neglect the principles of evidence upon which judicial 
questions are settled every day. But, 

4. Mere number of the witnesses in general, without 
regard to the fact of their being or not being tested, is of 
no weight whatever. We have already seen that the 
coming forward of many in their numbers and with their 
unanimity may be the very best reason for rejecting them 
all without compunction. 

5. The relative weight of manuscripts, versions, and 



Determination of the Text. 133 

citations must be duly observed. However true it may be 
that by the latter two branches of evidence we test in 
no small degree the value of the first, it is not the less 
true that as a general branch of evidence the first is, 
when attested, entitled to the preference even over those 
by which it has been tried. The circumstance, however, 
that it is tried by them shows that there are certain 
cases in which they may claim to bear away the palm. 
Such cases must be carefully adverted to, and errors 
must be distinguished into their different classes, as for 
example of addition or omission, when we would know 
the special value attaching to each of our three great 
classes of authorities. 

6. In judging of the balance of evidence, great impor- 
tance is to be attached to the meeting of different streams 
of evidence, to the concurrence, that is, of authorities 
from different quarters of the world, to the combination 
in favour of the same reading of such groups as were 
previously described. 

7. It is not to be forgotten that if any of these groups 
combine in favour of what we have reason to suppose 
to be the more ancient text, their verdict must be accepted 
as conclusive. We have already seen that the simple 
fact that a reading is ancient does not prove it to be 
good. It may be a presumption in its favour, but that 
is all. But when, being thus ancient, it is supported by 
authorities from different quarters of the world ; in other 
words, when a group of authorities unite in favour of 
what we can otherwise prove to be ancient, we have 
exactly the consideration added that was wanting to 



134 Determination of the Text. 

prove that it was not only ancient but correct. The 
wide diffusion of the ancient reading is established; 
that diffusion was owing to its vitality; and vitality 
is best explained by the supposition of originality and 
truth. 

We have now pointed out what seem to us the most 
important principles of external evidence. Other writers 
have sometimes given others, or have arranged them in 
a different order. Indeed most critics who endeavour to 
edit a text of the New Testament have to some extent 
at least rules or principles of their own. 

Before passing on it may be well to illustrate in a few 
sentences the application, in part at least, of the rules 
now laid down. 

We take a strong case first, the famous text regarding 
the three heavenly witnesses in 1 John v. 7, 8. As read 
in our English Version we find these words, a portion of 
which we shall enclose in brackets, "For there are three 
that bear record [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and 
the Holy G-host ; and these three are one. And there 
are three that bear witness in earth], the spirit, and the 
water, and the blood; and these three agree in one." 
The question is, Whether the words enclosed by us in 
brackets are genuine, or whether the text ought not 
rather simply to read, "For there are three that bear 
record, the spirit, the water, and the blood, and these 
three agree in one." 

With the exception of two manuscripts, the one 
belonging to the fifteenth, and the other to the sixteenth 
century, the whole body of Greek manuscript evidence 



Determination of the Text 135 

rejects the bracketed words in the above verses. These 
two manuscripts also do not stand the tests by which 
alone they can be shown to be worthy of much regard. 
Manuscript evidence could not be more decisive. We 
turn to versions. The suspicious words are wanting in 
every version except the Vulgate, nearly all the manu- 
scripts of which exhibit theni, those failing to do so 
being however generally recognized as the oldest and 
best. Even where given, too, they are given with very 
considerable variations ; and such variations are always 
a proof of the doubtfulness of the authorities whence 
the words were taken. The evidence of versions is here 
as decided as that of Greek manuscripts. Lastly, we 
look at citations from the Fathers. ISTo Greek Father is 
known to quote the passage, while several of the most 
important, in arguing on the subject of the Trinity, to 
which it has so direct a relation, refer both to what 
precedes and to what follows, but do not make the 
slightest allusion to the disputed words. Nothing could 
more clearly show that they were unacquainted with 
them. The most ancient and eminent Latin Fathers 
have likewise no knowledge of the words, and it is only 
in some of the later and more unimportant that they 
are discovered. The evidence of citations clearly ac- 
companies that of manuscripts and versions. 

In a case such as this it is obvious too, from what has 
been said, that all our streams of evidence . combine, 
and that even in point of numbers the vast majority of 
the witnesses, including every one proved and tested, are 
on one side. The application of every rule or principle 



136 Determination of the Text. 

of External Evidence leads to the exclusion of the dis- 
puted words. 

We take another case, Acts yiii. 37. In our English 
Version we read, "And Philip said, If thou believest 
with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered 
and said, I believe that Jesus is the Son of God." The 
question is, Whether these words ought to stand in the 
text, or to be excluded from it ? 

They are wanting in four out of the five chief witnesses 
described in the earlier part of this book : of the fifth 
nothing can be said, that portion of the manuscript 
having been unfortunately lost. They are wanting also 
in a large number of other manuscripts. They are 
found in one uncial manuscript alone, although in a 
considerable number of cursives. The case is by no 
means so decided as the last ; but our principles hardly 
admit of any other conclusion than one unfavourable to 
the presence of the words. We turn to versions. The 
verse is wanting in the best codices of the Vulgate, in 
two Syriac versions, in the versions of both Upper and 
Lower Egypt, and in the ^Ethiopia It is found in a 
codex of the Vulgate as well as in its printed text, in 
one of the Syriac versions, though there marked with an 
asterisk, and in the Armenian. Our first conclusion 
unfavourable to the verse is thus so far confirmed. 
Lastly, we look at citations from the Fathers. The 
verse was known to one or two of the Latin Fathers, 
but we have positive assurance that it was not re- 
cognized in any of the writings of Greek Fathers 
that have reached us, until, we come to one who 



Determination of the Text. 137 

flourished in the eleventh, and another who belongs to 
the twelfth century. That it should appear in the 
writings of the former need not surprise us, when we 
remember that the Latin versions are the chief authority 
for the words. That it should be wanting in the writ- 
ings of the latter is strong confirmatory evidence that it 
was unknown in Greek. Here again, therefore, the 
evidence of citations leads to the same conclusion as 
that of manuscripts and versions. 

The argument however is not in the present instance 
quite so strong as in the last. We ask therefore with 
more interest than then, What is the teaching of our 
groups of witnesses ? In one district of the world only 
does the verse appear to have been read, and that a 
district where we know from other evidence that there 
was a strong tendency to interpolate. Our groups there- 
fore deliver the same sentence as our individual witnesses. 
Finally, the number of tested witnesses against the 
words is greater than that upon their side. We sum 
up the evidence as a whole, and there can be no doubt 
that the verdict ought to be for the exclusion of the verse. 




OHAPTEE IX. 

DETERMINATION OF THE TEXT. — PAET II. 

RAVING- considered those principles of Ex- 
ternal Evidence by which the various read- 
ings of Scripture are to be judged, it remains 
for us to turn our thoughts to those prin- 
ciples of Internal Evidence which are neither less neces- 
sary nor important. 

II. Principles of Internal Evidence. 

Were the External Evidence on behalf of a parti- 
cular reading in every case complete and satisfactory, we 
should have little occasion to depend on anything but 
it. The contest would at once be settled by an over- 
whelming balance of testimony, either on the one side or 
on the other. It is rare, however, to find this in any dis- 
puted reading of much interest or importance. There is 
then almost always a decided difference of testimony. 
"Weighty arguments on their right to have a place in 
the text are urged by different claimants, and the 
balance of external authority is not unfrequently nearly 
equal. The application of Internal Evidence thus 
becomes indispensable. 



Determination of the Text. 139 

It is so in that ordinary administration of law, the 
processes of which, as we have seen, afford the best 
analogy to the course which the Biblical critic has to 
pursue. A judge can rarely, if ever, settle a dispute 
between two parties by external evidence alone. It is 
the mind that sees, and not the eye. It is the mind 
that hears, and not the ear ; and according to the light 
in which different assertions present themselves to the 
judge's mind will be the judgment that he forms. The 
probabilities of the case, and the internal coherence of 
the narrative, must always influence his decision ; and 
his verdict is to be viewed as the hypothesis that takes 
up and explains all the phenomena connected with the 
dispute. It is true that this necessity of reasoning on 
probabilities may often degenerate into mere subjec- 
tivity or wilfulness, and that a judge may carry out 
some theory of his own in such a manner as to set 
at naught well-established facts ; but therein lies the 
highest trial of the judge's skill. Therein judicial tact, 
ability, genius prove their infinite superiority to mere 
mechanical administration. Tor ten men who can learn 
rules, and apply them with accuracy to a case before 
them, we may be thankful to find one who, not acting 
apart from rule, can yet stand superior to rule, and can 
mould, in the fire of his own genius, both the external 
facts and the internal probabilities into one harmonious 
whole. It is the same in the criticism of the text of 
Scripture. External evidence is not only valuable ; it 
forms the very ground of our proceedings ; it sets before 
us the facts of which we are to judge. But then we 



140 Determination of the Text. 

must judge. The danger to which we are exposed of 
giving way to prepossessions, to subjective feelings, 
must be met ; and in the establishing of sound general 
principles, in the cultivation of a sound mind, lies the 
critic's power. This much at least is certain, that no 
editor of the Greek text of the New Testament, except 
one, who gave it distinctly to be understood that his 
aim was special and provisional in its character, has 
attempted to construct his text upon grounds of external 
authority alone. Over and above such grounds, the 
resort to internal evidence has been always found to be 
necessary. 

To these principles of Internal Evidence then we 
now proceed. The more important are the following: — 

1. That reading is to be preferred which seems to 
have suggested the others, or out of which it is most 
easy to suppose that the others would arise. The 
reason of the rule is obvious. By the supposition we 
have two or three different readings of a passage, with 
external evidence not sufficiently precise to remove all 
doubt as to which the preference is due. Our first 
object must evidently be to determine as far as we 
can their history, in other words, to ask how they 
severally arose. In doing so it is reasonable to conclude 
that the reading by whose existence the origin of the 
others is most easily explained is the correct one. Thus, 
for example — 

In John i. 37 we have three readings consisting in 
three different arrangements of the same words. One of 
these gives the translation of our English Version, 



Determination of the Text. 141 

"And the two disciples heard Him speak, and they 
followed Jesus." Another gives the translation, " And 

His two disciples heard Him speak, and they followed 
Jesus." The third puts the pronoun in such a position 
in the Greek that the meaning is ambiguous ; it might 
be either of the two just mentioned. Which of the 
three may be best regarded as the parent of the other 
two ? Not the first ; for there was nothing to make a 
scribe naturally slip into the second, while the ambiguity 
of the third is precisely what he would avoid. Not the 
second, for with it before him a scribe would be under 
no temptation to change it to the first, and as before, the 
ambiguity of the third would prevent his thinking of it. 
The third, however, at once meets the necessities of the 
case. It is ambiguous. One scribe therefore, who 
viewed it in the first light, put down the words in the 
order there given. Another, who viewed it in the 
second light, made the order correspond to his im- 
pression of the sense. The third then is most probably 
the true reading. 

Another illustration of this rule is taken by Dr. 
Davidson from the celebrated text in 1 Tim. iii. 16, and 
it is so suitable to the purpose that we shall again use 
it here. Three readings meet us in the first clause of 
that verse, that of our English version, " Great is the 
mystery of godliness, God was manifest in the flesh,"' or 
rather, "was manifested in flesh ;" "who was manifested 
in flesh ; " " which was manifested in flesh." The 
external evidence in favour of one of these rather than 
the others is no doubt strong, but it is not so over- 



142 Determination of the Text 

whelming as to make us independent of the probabilities 
of the case. We ask then, How does our present rule 
apply ? Let us suppose that " God " was the original 
reading. It is difficult to imagine how, with a reading 
the sense of which is in strict conformity with the 
teaching of the New Testament, a scribe should think of 
substituting " who," which, it will be observed, is then 
a relative without an antecedent. It is still more 
difficult to imagine how the important word " God " 
could pass into the neuter relative " which." The word 
" mystery" no doubt supplies an antecedent in this latter 
case, but the change is too great to have been made inad- 
vertently. Again, let us suppose that "which" was the 
original, it could neither pass easily into "who" without 
an antecedent while itself has one, nor into "God," which 
involves a change of the greatest magnitude. Finally, 
let us suppose that the original reading was " who." We 
see at once, even without taking into account some parti- 
culars connected with the style of writing which greatly 
strengthen the inference, how it could pass into " God." 
"God manifest in flesh" was known to be "the great 
mystery of godliness." It was most natural to express it. 
In the hands of another scribe "who" might pass with 
equal ease into "which." The change of one letter only was 
involved, the sense was not altered, an antecedent was 
obtained where the want of one could not fail to be felt. 
"Who" therefore, as giving rise most simply to the other 
two, is the true reading. It is interesting to observe in 
connection with this case, that, after long and keen dis- 
cussions, scholars are now generally agreed that even 



Determination of the Text. 143 

external evidence, when at least we depend mainly on 
those authorities whose high importance we have advo- 
cated in these pages, leads to the same conclusion. We 
have thus our confidence in the soundness of what has 
been said both as to them and as to our present rule 
much strengthened. 

2. A second most important and universally recognized 
rule of InternalEvidence is that the more difficult reading 
is to be preferred to the more easy. The critic, (Bengel), 
not less distinguished for his piety than his talents, who 
first suggested this rule, has himself said that he regards 
it as but one application of the far wider principle, that 
good is difficult and evil easy of attainment. The reason 
of the rule is obvious. A scribe was far more likely 
to substitute an easy for a difficult than a difficult for an 
easy reading. In speaking in the earlier part of this 
volume of the causes of yarious readings, allusion was 
made to the point now before us. But if, as then ex- 
plained, a scribe was apt in copying a manuscript to 
substitute a simple for a hard expression, the converse 
must hold good that, in restoring the true text in cases of 
dispute, the hard is entitled to the preference. Let us 
illustrate what has been said by one or two simple 
examples of different classes belonging to the one 
general principle. 

(1) A reading at first sight obscure is to be preferred 
to one that is plain and easily understood. Thus, in 
John vii. 39, we read in our English Version, "Tor the 
Holy Ghost was not yet given, because that Jesus was 
not yet glorified." It will be observed that the word 



144 Determination of the Text 

"given" is in italic letters, showing that it did not exist 
in the Greek text from which our version was taken, and 
many most important authorities present this as the 
true reading. Many others however add the Greek 
word for " given," and we have to decide between them. 
Our present rule comes to our aid. When we read without 
the "given" the text is much more difficult to under- 
stand than when we read with it. A scribe, therefore, 
was less likely to omit it if he found it in the text before 
him than to insert it if it was not there. The conclusion 
is that in the original it probably did not exist. 

(2) A reading presenting a historical difficulty is to be 
preferred to one from which the difficulty is removed. 
Thus, in Mark ii. 26, we read in our English Bibles of 
David, "how he entered into the house of God in the 
days of Abiathar the high-priest." Various important 
authorities, however, omit these last words altogether, 
while others, retaining them, substitute the word "priest" 
for " high-priest." Both changes obviate the serious 
difficulty arising from a comparison of this passage with 
1 Samuel xxi. 1, where the incident in David's life here 
referred to is related in the words, "Then came David 
to Nob, to Ahimelech the priest." Precisely on that 
ground, however, are these authorities to be suspected. 
A scribe knowing the difficulty would be much more 
ready to omit them if they had a place in his text than 
to insert them if they had not. 

(3) A reading in one Gospel which seems to convey 
a sense different from that of a parallel passage in 
another Gospel is to be preferred to one which makes 



Determination of the Text. 145 

the two Gospels strictly harmonize. Thus in Matt. ix. 
13 we read, " For I am not come to call the righteous, but 
sinners to repentance/'' The last two words, however, 
"to repentance," are frequently omitted. Shall we read 
them, or shall we not? Looking at the question for the 
present only in the light of Internal Evidence, Ave have 
to consider that the words are found in the parallel 
passage, Luke v. 37, where they are certainly genuine. 
The probability is, that from that text they found their 
way into St. Matthew. 

We notice only one additional rule of Internal Evi- 
dence. 

3. The style of writing characteristic of particular 
writers, or what we know of their modes of thought, is to 
be taken into account in judging of the various readings 
of their text. Thus in John xiii. 24 we read in our 
Authorized Version, " Simon Peter therefore beckoned to 
him that lie should ask who it should be of whom He 
spake." But there is much authority for Greek words 
that give us the translation, " Simon Peter therefore 
beckoneth to him, and saith to him, Tell us who it is ot 
whom He speaketh." The former reading requires the 
verb "should be" to be in the Greek optative mood; but 
St. John never uses the optative. It is not likely there- 
fore that he would depart on the present occasion from 
his usual practice: and. the last of the two readings 
mentioned thus finds corroborative evidence in its 
support. 

Or, let us take an example in which mode of thought 
rather than merely literary style becomes the object of 



146 Determination of the Text 

consideration. John vi. 11, formerly considered in 
another aspect, will supply an illustration. The question 
there, it will be remembered, is as to the omission of 
certain words, the effect of omitting which is to represent 
Jesus Himself as distributing the bread to the multitude, 
while the common reading brings in the intervention of 
the disciples. It is disputed which of these two readings 
is the right one. Let us bear in mind that the great 
object of S. John's Gospel is to set forth the glory of the 
Eedeemer, to present Him to us in His single and 
unapproachable majesty as the Giver of all good, and we 
are at once led to conclude that the reading which 
favours this idea is most likely to be correct. It is 
needless to do more than say that either reading is 
equally consistent with the facts of the case. There is 
simply a slight difference in the point of view from 
which the writer speaks. 

Other rules of Internal Evidence are given by 
different writers additional to those now mentioned. 
But even were they of more value than they are, we have 
said enough to convey to our readers an impression of 
the character of that part of the New Testament critic's 
work that is now before us. 

It has only to be observed, in conclusion, regarding 
these rules, that each may easily be pushed too far, and 
may be used by the critic to reach his conclusion with 
too great rapidity. It may well happen in many a case 
that the reading which seems most naturally to present 
itself to us as the parent of the others is not really so ; 
that the plain reading may have been, by the ignorance of 



Determination of the Text. 147 

some scribe, transformed into the obscure instead of the 
obscure into the plain ; that from the same cause a his- 
torical difficulty may have found its way into a copy when 
there was none in the original ; that parallel passages 
which really correspond may have been brought to differ, 
instead of parallels that differ having been brought to 
correspond ; that a writer may at times use a method of 
expression different from his common one. All these 
things are possible, and the too rigid application of any 
one rule might thus easily betray us. The lesson to be 
learned is one of caution, and that probabilities must be 
balanced one against another if we would hope to reach 
a conclusion on all sides capable of defence. 

Finally, it has to be noted that rules such as those Ave 
have been considering must never be so applied as to 
overbear External Evidence. They are not guides in all 
cases, but helps in cases of difficulty. They aid in 
determining our scales to one side rather than another, 
when, but for them, the balance would be too equally 
poised or too uncertain. Even when not absolutely 
needed, they often confirm the verdict drawn forth by 
External Evidence alone ; and, in doing so, leave no 
doubt upon our minds that we have the very words 
before us in which the Almighty revealed His will to 
man. 



CHAPTEE X. 

GENERAL SUMMARY. 




jjX the two previous chapters we have con- 
sidered the leading principles or rules by 
which we are to be guided in estimating the 
weight due to the evidence laid before us, 
with respect to disputed readings of the New Testa- 
ment, One or two general remarks may fitly close the 
subject, 

1. Such definite principles as those that have been 
laid down are absolutely essential to the right prose- 
cution of the task of which we have been speaking. 
jSTo task can be named in which there is Greater danger 
of hasty or haphazard judgments, of judgments founded 
upon prejudice or determined by inclination. And cer- 
tainly none can be named in which we are more bound 
to avoid with the utmost care every influence of the 
kind, and to come to our conclusion only by steps, every 
one of which has been taken with the utmost delibera- 
tion, and in a way that we feel ourselves able to defend. 
Our rules are a valuable aid in enabling us to do so. 
They are not arbitrary. They are founded upon a wide 



General Summary. 149 

induction of particulars. They shape themselves ac- 
cording to reason and the nature of the case. The 
knowledge of them thus directs us to a higher and more 
correct exercise of our powers than we could have made 
without them. We are taught to avoid many mistakes 
into which we might otherwise fall. We gain the 
feeling of security that belongs not to instinct but to 
intelligence ; and even where our rules are insufficient 
of themselves to lead us to our verdict, they indicate 
certain principles which the verdict, when we reach it, 
must not contravene. 

2. They are not to be thought of only as individual 
rules, to be applied one at one time and another at 
another, in an outward and formal manner. It may 
often happen, no doubt, that one is sufficient for our 
purpose. But the instances are far more frequent where 
many or even all of them must be applied. They must 
be held therefore in combination. They must thoroughly 
penetrate and pervade the mind, so as to exercise a 
modifying and restraining influence upon each other, 
and to be ready for use, either singly or in ever-varying 
combinations, according to the nature of each particular 
case. 

jSTothing indeed will force itself more upon the mind 
of the textual critic of the Xew Testament, as he 
pursues his labours, than the impossibility of coming to 
a satisfactory conclusion in innumerable cases of dispute 
by the mere reckoning up of witnesses, or such mere 
calculations of probability as formal rules supply. The 
evidence is so large in quantity, the witnesses that agree 



150 General Summary, 

as to one text so often differ as to another, the internal 
considerations that must be taken into account strike 
different minds, and even the same mind at different 
times, in such a different way, that anything like a fixed 
mechanical application of rules will be found in practice 
to be impossible. Every particular case needs to be 
considered in itself. Every witness needs to be weighed 
not simply as a whole but in the particular book in 
which the text under examination occurs. Every sug- 
gestion arising from internal probabilities needs to be 
balanced by its opposite. The history of all the changes 
that have taken place on the original reading must as far 
as possible be discovered, so that that original reading, 
when decided on, shall contain, in itself a solution of the 
problem, How what was one at the first came to assume 
so many varying forms in different countries and at the 
hands of successive scribes. 

All this, it is evident, demands extensive knowledge, 
great calmness and impartiality of judgment, and the tact 
w T hich, when not a happy natural endowment, can be 
gained only by long practical experience. In point of 
fact, accordingly, successful editors of the text of the 
New Testament have been very few in number. Had 
the work been one of formal rule they would have been 
many; but the demands which it makes are so great that 
a comparatively small number have attempted it, and 
of these only one or two have gained a lasting fame. 

3. Yet it does not follow that the ordinary minister 
of the Gospel, the student of divinity, or even the cul- 
tivated private Christian, ought to leave the whole 



General Summary. 151 

matter of deciding on the text of the New Testament in 
the hands of the few who can devote to it the whole 
labour of their lives, and feel that even that is too little 
to accomplish what they undertake. Where we cannot 
discover we may yet follow with delight the discoveries 
of others. Where we cannot make original suggestions 
we can in a great degree estimate the value of sugges- 
tions that are made to us. Where we cannot combine 
the steps of an intricate proposition, we can judge of the 
accuracy of the combination set before us. We can 
analyze where we cannot create, and verify where we 
cannot produce. In so doing, we share at least some 
part of the pleasure experienced by creative minds ; we 
enter into fellowship with them ; we learn to know the 
principles upon which they work; and we catch, 
although it may be afar off', some of the gleams of their 
inspiration. Nor is our imperfect knowledge without 
even a wholesome influence upon them. It is a check 
to what might otherwise be their onesidedness. It 
spurs them to exertion and rewards their toil. 

No mistake therefore can be greater than to think 
that, because the private Christian cannot do all in the 
work of textual criticism, he should do nothing. If, 
by studying its resources, its aims, and its principles, he 
gain no more than the conviction that it is really a 
science, the gain will be of the highest advantage both 
to himself and to the Church of Christ. With this 
confidence we now proceed to the third and last division 
of our subject. 



PART THIRD. 

RESULTS. 



PART THIRD. 

RESULTS. 




CHAPTER I. 

EFFECT PRODUCED BY TEXTUAL CRITICISM UPON IMPORTANT 
TEXTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 

1 AVING examined the principles upon which 
the text of the New Testament is to be 
determined, it may be i satisfactory to our 
readers if we set before them the most im- 
portant results which flow from an application of these 
principles. For this purpose, we shall, in the first place, 
direct attention to a few texts peculiarly interesting on 
doctrinal or other grounds, and shall briefly discuss the 
readings which in these cases seem to have the best claim 
to be accepted. To this the present chapter will be de- 
voted. We shall then, in the chapter which follows, pass 
successively through the books of the New Testament, 
and note in each chapter, without entering into argument, 
all the changes of any importance which require to be 
made in the received text. Our readers will thus have 
before them the leading " results " of textual criticism. 



156 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon 

Matthew xi. 19. 

In the last clause of this verse we read in the received 
text, " But Wisdom is justified of her children/' and this 
is the undoubted reading in the parallel passage in Luke 
vii. 35, except that the word " all " is inserted there, 
" But Wisdom is justified of all her children." In the 
passage before us, however, a very important variation 
claims attention, " But Wisdom is justified of " or " by 
her works." The evidence in favour of the received 
reading is strong — B as corrected by a later hand, all 
uncial manuscripts except two, nearly all later manu- 
scripts, most of the old Latin versions, the Vulgate, the 
Curetonian Syriac, the Gothic, and the Armenian as 
edited. Two or three Fathers also bear similar testi- 
mony, although in the case of the two most ancient it is 
doubtful whether their quotations may not be taken from 
the. Gospel of St. Luke. On the other side we have 
two uncial manuscripts, and these the most ancient 
and valuable possessed by us N and B, one cursive 
manuscript, together with the testimony of Jerome that 
" works " was found in some of the Gospels in his day, 
the Coptic, Syriac, Armenian in its codices, iEthiopic, 
and Persic versions. The mass of evidence may therefore 
be said to be in favour of the common text. But various 
important considerations have to be taken into account. 

(1.) Constant experience shows that a reading sup- 
ported by ^ and B together is not to be set aside, 
except on very strong grounds. 

(2.) The point before us is one to which versions can 



Important Texts of the New Testament. 157 

bear valuable testimony, and the balance of 
evidence from this source is in favour of "works/ 3 

(3.) The reading of the iEthiopic codices is peculiarly 
interesting. It combines the two, u of her works 
and of her children/' evidently in the circum- 
stances a composite reading of which the first 
part is most probably the foundation. 

(4.) The well-established rule, that a reading in one 
Gospel different from that of the parallel passage 
in another Gospel is more likely to be correct 
than one exactly similar, is in favour of " works." 1 

(5.) The equally well-established rule that the more 
difficult is to be preferred to the more easy 
reading leads to the same conclusion. If 
" children " were the original reading, it is not 
easy to account for a change to " works." If 
" works " were the original, the substitution of 
" children " can at once be understood. 2 

(6.) In the sense thus afforded there is nothing ob- 
jectionable. Those who see here a doctrine 
similar to that of a sinner's justification by works, 
fail to notice that it is not a sinner but heavenly 
wisdom that is spoken of, as well as the fact that 
the Greek verb to justify is never used in its 
theological sense with the Greek preposition 
found in this verse. On the other hand, to say 
that " Wisdom is justified of her works " is in 
striking harmony with the whole tone of the 
passage. The life of Jesus and the life of John 

1 Comp. p. 14-1. 2 Comp. p. 143. 



158 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon 

are both among the works of Wisdom acting 
differently in different circumstances; and by 
both is Wisdom justified, commended to every 
open eye, vindicated as being what she really is. 
(7.) What has been last said is strengthened, if we 
observe that the correct translation of the Greek 
verb is " was" not " is justified," carrying us back 
in thought to the moment when Wisdom's works 
were planned, and not leading us to think only 
of the present instant, when the children of God 
approve what the children of the world cannot 
comprehend. 
We decide therefore in favour of the reading, — 
" But Wisdom was justified of her works." 

Mark in. 29. 

We take next a text from the Gospel of St. Mark. 
In iii. 29, we read in the received version, " But he that 
shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never for- 
giveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation." The 
reading "damnation" or rather "judgment" here is 
supported by A and by a corrector of C, by several 
other uncials, by the mass of cursives, by the Syriac, and 
by two valuable manuscripts representing, or nearly so, 
the Latin as revised by Jerome. On the other hand the 
word " sin" is read instead of "judgment" by N, B, by 
one or two other uncials, and cursives with an ancient 
text, by the old Latin versions except one, by the Vul- 
gate, and manuscripts representing Jerome's revision of 
it except one, by the Coptic, Armenian, and Gothic, and 



Important Texts of the New Testament. 159 

by one or two Fathers both in the East and in the West. 
The evidence seems at first sight more equally divided 
than in our last example. But again, as there, several 
considerations have to be taken into account. 

(1.) We have the same important conjunction of N 
and B as met us in the last case, but backed 
here by a larger number of uncials. 
(2.) Another word for " sin," applying to sin in its 
more general character rather than as a particular 
offence, is found in C (as appears), D, and two or 
three cursives, thus showing; that the reading " sin" 
was both well known and felt to be difficult. 
(3.) The evidence of versions, both numerous and 

widespread, is in favour of " sin." 
(4.) The difficulty of the reading "sin" is unques- 
tionably greater than that of the reading "judg- 
ment ; " so much so, that we seem to see the 
gradation by which it passed out of the text; 
first, the more general word for " sin" being sub- 
stituted for that denoting a specific act of sin, 
and then " judgment" coming in as easier still. 
This consideration lends strong probability to 
the reading " sin." x 
(5.) It may be asked, What is the meaning of an 
eternal sin ? The answ T er most probably is, a sin 
never to be blotted out, and a sense — not, let it 
be observed, actual words — is thus given coming 
much more near that of the parallel passage in 
Matt. xii. 32 than we should otherwise possess. 

1 Comp. p. 143. 



160 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon 

We decide therefore in favour of the reading, — 

" But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost 
hath never forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin." 

Luke ii. 14. 

We take next a text in the Gospel of St. Luke. The 
song of the heavenly host at the birth of Jesus is given 
by that Evangelist in ii. 14, in the following words; 
" Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good 
will towards men." But there is another reading which 
greatly changes the aspect of the verse. It is difficult to 
render it in English, but literally rendered, and we con- 
tent ourselves with such a rendering for the present, it 
will run — " Glory to God in the highest, and on earth 
peace among men of good pleasure " or " good will." 
The evidence in favour of the received reading is several 
uncial manuscripts, among which are readings introduced 
into N and B by later correctors, as it would seem all 
cursive manuscripts, the Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and 
iEthiopic versions, and a considerable number of the 
Greek Eathers. On the other side we have four of the 
most important uncials, itf, B, A, D, the first two, though 
afterwards corrected, having so read in their original 
form, the old Latin, the Vulgate, and the Gothic 
versions, together with at least two very ancient and 
important Fathers, one belonging to the West the other 
to the East. Such is the evidence; how shall we 
decide ? 

(1.) Our two most important manuscripts are here 
supported by other ancient authority; and so 



Important Texts of the New Testament. 161 

much greater, therefore, is the weight due to 
them. On the other hand, 
(2.) The evidence of versions is in favour of the read- 
ing commonly received. 
(3.) The important fact meets us that the most learned 
and critical Greek Father of early Christianity 
not only knew the reading not received, but that 
he argues from it, and depends upon it, in 
establishing a point he has in view. 
(-4.) The long rejected reading is by much the more 
difficult of the two. We can see at once how a 
transcriber of the Greek should have substituted 
the one now familiar to us for the other. How 
the contrary course should have been taken by 
any it is most difficult to conceive. 
These considerations lead to the conclusion that the 
received reading is to be rejected and the other put into 
its place. It may be said, Is not the parallelism thus 
destroyed ? We answer, ISTo. It is preserved. The 
Greek has only two members, not three. There is no 
copula between the two which are generally considered 
to be the second and the third members of the group. 
The word "and" divides the whole sentence into its 
parts, and unless what follows that word can be gathered 
into one clause the parallelism is broken. The new 
reading enables us to do so ; and, bearing in mind that 
"good will" or "good pleasure" here is not a humap 
virtue, but the Divine benevolence or love, the merciful 
purpose of God towards His people, the passage as a 
whole will run : — 

L 



1(32 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon 

11 Glory to God, in the highest, 

and 
On earth peace, in men whom in His good pleasure 
He hath chosen." 

John i. 1 8. 

From the Gospel of St. John we select the very 
important text, i. 18. There we read in our English 
Bible, " No man hath seen God at any time ; the only 
begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He 
hath declared Him." Another reading, however, presents 
itself to our notice in the substitution of the word 
14 God" for the word " Son," together with the dropping 
of the definite article before " only begotten," thus giving 
us the text in the form, " No man hath seen God at any 
time ; an (or the) only begotten God which is in the 
bosom of the Father hath declared Him." 

For the received text we have the authority of A, 
a late corrector of C, and several other uncials, almost 
all cursives, several of the old Latin versions, the Vul- 
gate, the Curetonian, the Philoxenian, and the Jerusalem 
Syriac, the Armenian, and one edition of the iEthiopic, 
the old Latin interpreter of Irenseus, Origen, and several 
other Greek and Latin Fathers. For the reading " God " 
we have the authority of N, B, the original hand of C, 
another highly important uncial not spoken of in our 
previous pages, one cursive with an ancient text, the 
Coptic version, the common Syriac version as edited by 
two different scholars, one edition of the iEthiopic, the 
Latin interpreter of Irenseus in other passages than 



Important Texts of the New Testament. 163 

those referred to under the previous head, Origen also 
in other passages than those spoken of, and several, 
especially Greek, Fathers, among whom we find Arius 
and writers of the Valentinian school. 

In reviewing this evidence it is to be observed — 

(1.) That the weight of manuscript authority is de- 
cidedly in favour of the reading " God." 

(2.) That versions testify to a wider range of this 
reading than of the other in the early Church. 

[o.) That the Fathers cannot be implicitly relied on, 
as the more important of them may be quoted 
on both sides. 

(4.) That, notwithstanding this, there is a degree of 
distinctness and precision in their references to 
" God," as the reading, that we do not find in 
their references to " Son." 
5.) Besides this, it was quite natural that they should 
often speak of " the only begotten Son," for the 
term u Son" was that commonly used of Jesus. 
It was not so natural that they should speak of 
" the only begotten God," for the language is not 
only strange in itself, but the term " God" was 
commonly used of the Father. It is impossible 
therefore to account for their use of this latter 
expression at all unless they were thoroughly 
satisfied that it was the true reading. "Son" 
was to them the appropriate designation of Jesus, 
and their argument is, that this " Son" is called 
" God" in the passage of St. John now before us. 

(6.) This argument is strengthened by the fact that 



164 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon 

the Valentinian heretics read u God/' a circum- 
stance which would tend to make the Church 
suspicious of it unless convinced that the read- 
ing was correct. 

(7.) It is to be noticed that there were other variations 
of the reading known besides that which we are 
considering, such as " the only begotten Son of 
God," "the only begotten Son God," "the only be- 
gotten." These variations unquestionably point 
to "God" as the original and fundamental reading. 
that out of which, and the difficulties connected 
with which, they would most naturally arise. 1 

(8.) " God" is by much the more difficult of the 
two readings. We can at once understand how 
" Son" should be substituted for it. It is almost 
impossible to conceive how the contrary substi- 
tution could take place. Or, if it be thought that 
the variation began in the margin and from 
thence passed into the text, we see without diffi- 
culty how "God" being supposed to be in the 
latter, " Son" should be placed in the former as 
an explanatory gloss, but not how " God" should 
be put into the margin if " Son" were originally 
in the text. 

(9.) Lastly, the internal evidence is very strongly in 
favour of reading " God." It is the constant 
tendency of St. John to return at intervals to 
what he had placed at the beginning of a section 
or passage, or to what had been the leading 
thought upon which he had been dwelling. The 
1 Comp. p. 140. 



Important Texts of the New Testament. 165 

18th verse of tlie first chapter closes the prelude 
to his Gospel, and is exactly the place, therefore, 
where we might expect to meet with such a 
summary. But in that prelude he had had his 
mind fixed on two points, that in Jesus we have 
that Word of God which is God, and that Jesus 
is the only begotten of the Father. Now, then, 
as he draws all the sublime statements of this 
prelude to his Gospel to a close, he sums them 
up in the words, " Xo man hath seen God at 
any time : the only begotten God which is in 
the bosom of the Father hath declared Him." 
We accept this as the true reading of this most 
important verse. 

Acts xx. 28. 

Having examined a text from each of the Gospels, we 
shall now take one from the Acts of the Apostles, and 
thereafter note one or two more from the other books of 
the New Testament. We take Acts xx. 28, the words 
of St. Paul at Miletus, when he urges the elders of 
Ephesus " to feed the Church of God, which He hath 
purchased with His own blood." Instead of " God," 
however, not a few authorities read " the Lord," and 
the following is the evidence. 

For the reading " the Lord " three important ancient 
manuscripts, one additional uncial, a good many 
cursives, the Egyptian, and one of the Syriac versions, 
the Armenian version, and a considerable number of 
Fathers. For the reading " God" our two most important 



166 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon 

uncials N and B, and several cursives, the Vulgate, the 
best codices testifying to the Vulgate as revised by 
Jerome, the Philoxenian Syriac, and a considerable 
number of Fathers. It is to be noticed also that varia- 
tions such as the following meet us : " The Lord and 
God," " God and the Lord," " the Lord God," " Christ," 
and in one Latin version " Jesus Christ." This state of 
the evidence seems to warrant the remarks : — 

(1.) That the most valuable manuscript evidence is 

undoubtedly in favour of the reading " God." 
(2) Evidence from versions is about equally divided; 
for if on the one side we have the Egyptian 
versions, on the other w^e have the Latin as 
revised by Jerome. 
(3.) The evidence of Fathers is also about equally 
divided, although it leans to the support of 
" God." 
We have here evidently a case in which, considering 
the number of variations that have arisen, much weight 
is due to the rule explained, p. 140, that the reading 
which is most probably the parent of all the others 
is also most probably the true one. We add, therefore, 
(4.) That all the variations noted by us are much 
more likely to have sprung from " God " than 
from " the Lord." Supposing " the Lord " to 
have been the original reading we cannot under- 
stand how " and God " should have been added. 
If " God " were the original we can easily under- 
stand how changes should have been introduced 
to soften such an expression as " God, who 



Important Texts of the New Testament. 167 

purchased with His own blood." In proof of 
this we find that a Latin interpreter of the Greek 
Ignatius changes an expression of the latter, 
" the blood of God " into " the blood of Christ 
God ; " and further, that the Latin translator of 
Irenseus makes use of the reading a the Lord," 
while the course of his argument leads to the 
inference that he had " God " before him in his 
Greek. 

(5.) The expression " the Church of God " is one 
common in St. Paul's Epistles, but he never 
speaks of " the Church of the Lord." 

(6.) The reading " God " is a much more difficult one 
than " the Lord," when we look at the words 
immediately following. 

These considerations lead to the adoption of the read- 
ing— 

" The Church of God, which He hath purchased with 
His own blood." 

Eom. v. 1. 

By the change of a single letter in the Greek, we here 
read " let us have," instead of " we have," in the Author- 
ized Version. The evidence stands as follows : For " let 
us have" A, B, C, D, X, etc., the earliest versions, 
Augustine, Chrysostom, Theodoret, and many others of 
the Fathers. For "we have" tw r o or three second-rate 
uncials, some inferior versions, and a few of the Fathers. 
The preponderance of authority is therefore distinctly in 
favour of the former reading, and the verse should run 
as follows : — 



168 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon 

" Therefore, being justified by faith, let us have peace 
with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." 

Eom. vm. 1. 

It has been previously observed that the last clause 
of this verse is an interpolation. For it there are some 
inferior uncials, a few Fathers, and one or two late 
versions. Against it there are B, C, D, N, etc., Augustine, 
Cyril, Athanasius, and others of the Fathers, with some 
versions. The evidence is thus clearly against the 
clause, and the verse should read thus : — 

"There is therefore now no condemnation to them 
which are in Christ Jesus." 

Eph. i. 1. 

The question here is, whether or not the words " in 
Ephesus" are genuine. It is no easy matter to decide. 
On the one hand, the great mass of authorities of all kinds 
is in favour of the words : on the other hand, B and 
N, the two most ancient manuscripts, are against them. 
Basil the Great, who lived in the fourth century, declares 
that they were wanting in ancient copies of the New 
Testament in his day. There are some other statements 
of the Fathers to the same effect, so that we can form, 
in the present state of the evidence, no very decided 
judgment on either side. It is certainly somewhat diffi- 
cult to understand how St. Paul could have written an 
epistle specially addressed to the church at Ephesus, 
and yet make not a single personal allusion to any in 
the place where he had lived and laboured so long. If 



Important Texts of the New Testament. 169 

the epistle be regarded as encyclical — that is, as intended 
to circulate among the several churches of Asia Minor, 
that difficulty will be removed, and the opening verse 
will read thus : — 

" Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, by the will of God, 
to those that are saints, and to the faithful in Christ 
Jesus." 

Heb. ii. 9. 

A singular various reading occurs in this verse. In- 
stead of the words u by the grace of God" some manu- 
scripts and a number of the early Fathers read "without" 
or " apart from God." Origen, in the third century, knew 
both readings, but the latter seems to have been the 
dominant one, as he expounds it, and says that "by the 
grace of God" was found only "in some copies." Theo- 
doret, in the fifth century, knew of no other reading 
than " without God," and the same is true of others of 
the Fathers. Still, although patristic evidence is here 
strong, there seem good reasons, both external and in- 
ternal, for adhering to the common text. All the manu- 
scripts and versions of most weight are in favour of " by 
the grace of God " and this expression is in analogy 
with the rest of Scripture, whereas " apart from God " 
rests on but w T eak manuscript authority, and seems 
totally unlike any statement to be met with elsewhere 
in Scripture. 

This verse therefore will stand as in the received 
text. 



170 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon 

1 Pet. hi. 15. 

A very interesting and important various reading 
occurs in this verse, viz., the substitution of Christ for 
God. In favour of the text as it stands there are a few 
uncials, and one or two Fathers, but in support of the 
reading Christ w T e have A,B, C, N, etc., the best versions, 
and several of the Fathers. There can be no doubt, 
therefore, that a change should here be made in the 
text. And that change is of the greatest importance, 
for, as the Apostle here applies to Christ language 
which in the Old Testament is made use of with refer- 
ence to Jehovah (see Isa. viii. 13), he clearly suggests 
the supreme Godhead of our Eedeemer. The clause 
then, will stand thus : — 

" 'But sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts." 

1 John ii. 23. 

This verse stands in the Authorized Version as follows : 
"Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the 
Father : [but] he that acknowledged the Son hath the 
Father also" By the use of italics in the second clause 
it is suggested that the w-ords rest on doubtful or insuffi- 
cient authority. But (with the exception of the initial 
but) textual criticism has fully demonstrated their gen- 
uineness. They are omitted in some uncial manuscripts, 
but are found in A, B, C, N, in the versions, and in 
Clement, Origen, and others of the Fathers. The verse 
then should, without any hesitation, be read as follows: — 

" Whosoever denieth the Son. the same hath not the 



Important Texts of the New Testament. 171 

Father : he that acknowledged the Son hath the Father 
also." 

1 John hi. 1. 

A remarkable addition should be made to the text in 
this verse. Against the addition " and we are " there 
are two or three uncials, the Coptic version, and one or 
two Fathers. But in favour of the addition there are 
A, B, C, N, with Augustine and others of the Fathers. 
The addition therefore should, on all sound critical 
principles, certainly be made, and the verse will accord- 
ingly stand thus — 

" Behold, what manner of love the Father hath 
bestowed upon us, that we should be called children of 
God ; and we are [such] : therefore the world knoweth 
us not, because it knew Him not." 

1 John v. 13. 

This verse reads very strangely in the common text : 
" These things have I written unto you that believe on 
the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye 
have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name 
of the Son of God." Beaders of the epistle are thus 
declared to do in the first clause what they are exhorted 
to do in the last. But the balance of authority seems 
against the verse as it stands. For it there are one or 
two uncials and a few Fathers ; against it there are B, N, 
the Syriac versions, and some of the Fathers. A is here 
peculiar. It omits the clause " that believe on the name 
f the Son of God." But, in accordance with the evi- 



o 



172 Effect produced by Textual Criticism. 

dence just stated, we should probably read the verse 
thus, — 

" These things have I written unto you, that ye may 
know that ye have eternal life, ye who believe on the 
name of the Son of God." 

Eev. xvn. 8. 

The two last clauses of this verse seem flatly to contra- 
dict each other in the common text. " The beast that 
thou sawest was, and is not ; and shall ascend out of 
the bottomless pit, and go into perdition : and they that 
dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not 
written in the book of life from the foundation of the 
world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, 
and yet is." There is hardly any evidence whatever for 
this paradoxical reading. A and N combine against it, 
and support the following, which is also confirmed by 
patristic authority : — 

" The beast that thou sawest was, and is not ; and 
shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and goeth into 
perdition ; and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, 
whose names are not written in the book of life from 
the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast, 
that he was, and is not, and shall [again] be." 




CHAPTEE IT. 

EFFECT PRODUCED BY TEXTUAL CRITICISM UPON THE TEXT 
OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IX ITS SUCCESSIVE BOOKS. 

IAVTNG pointed out the manner in which the 
principles of textual criticism explained in 
the earlier chapters of this book are to be 
applied to a few of the more important texts 
of the New Testament, we shall now endeavour to con- 
vey to our readers some impression of the general effect 
to be expected from the application of these principles 
to the Xew Testament as a whole. It will be impossible 
to note every change of text that ought legitimately to 
follow from our premisses, and many of them are so 
trifling that the English reader, especially on first making 
acquaintance with the subject, cannot be expected to 
take much interest in them. We shall confine ourselves 
therefore to such changes as really affect the meaning of 
the original. 

Gospel oe St. Matthew. 

Chap i. The only change of interest in this chapter 
v. 25. is in v. 25, where, speaking of the mother of our 



L74 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

Lord, the Evangelist ought to be made to say 

" till she brought forth a son/' not " till she 

brought forth her first-born son." 

Chap. ii. The second chapter in like manner affords 

only one change needing to be noted, for in 

v. 18. v. 18 the words "lamentation and" ought to 

be omitted, and the text, thus making a nearer 

approach to the language of the prophet, 

should read, "In Kama was there a voice 

heard, weeping and great mourning." 

Chap. iii. The changes of the third chapter do not call 

for notice. 
Chap. iv. And the same remark applies to those of 

the fourth. 

Chap. v. In the fifth chapter we ought to read v. 

v. 22. 22, omitting " without cause," " whosoever is 

angry with his brother shall be in danger of the 

v. 27. judgment." 1 In v. 27 the words " by them of 

v. 32. old time " ought to be omitted. In v. 32, 

where our present text gives us " causeth her 

to commit adultery," we should find, " causeth 

adultery to be committed upon her," or 

" causeth her to suffer adultery," that is, treat- 

eth her as though she were an adulteress. In 

v. 44. v. 44 several clauses are to be omitted, and 

the reading ought to be, " but I say unto you, 

Love your enemies, and pray for them which 

/;. 47. persecute you." In v. 47, for the words " do 

not even the publicans," we ought to read " do 

not even the heathen the same ? " And, finally, 

1 Comp. p. no. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 175 

r. 48. in v. 48 we ought to be instructed to be perfect, 
not as our " Father which is in heaven/' but 
as our " heavenly Father is perfect." 

Chap. vi. In the sixth chapter the first change that 

r. 1 meets us is that of v. 1, " Take heed that ye do 

not your righteousness " instead of K your alms 

v. 4, 6, before men." Xext, at the end of v. 4, 6, 18, 
18, we have to omit the word "openly." 1 Then, in 

v. 12. the fifth petition of the Lord's prayer in v. 12, 

we must read. " as w x e have forgiven," not " as 

. we forgive our debtors ; " while the cloxology of 

r. 13. the prayer in v. 13, " for Thine is the kingdom, 
and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen," 
must be left out, The only other change in 

c. 33. this chapter calling for notice is that of v. 33, 
where, wdien we read the verse, as Ave ought to 
do, in immediate connection with the preceding 
one, the true reading is much more beautiful 
than that of our English Version, " But seek ye 
first His kingdom and His righteousness." 

Chap. vii. In the seventh chapter only one change of 
importance meets us. It occurs in the last 

?-. 29. verse of the chapter, which will run, " For He- 
taught them as one having authority, and not 
as their scribes." 

Chap. viii. In the eighth chapter the reading of v. 10 

v. 10. becomes much more emphatic than as it stands, 
" Verily, I say unto you, With no man in Israel 
have I found so great faith." The grateful 
feelings of St. Peter's mother-in-law are more 

1 Comp. pp. 86, 109. 



176 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

fully brought out when we read, as we ought 
v. 15. to do, in v. 15, that " she ministered unto Him," 
v. 25. instead of "them." In v. 25 the true reading, 
omitting " us," sets before us much more 
graphically the quick alarmed cry of the dis- 
v. 31. ciples, " Lord, save; w T e perish." And in v. 31 
the subjection of the devils to our Lord is 
more pointed when we find them saying, as 
the true text requires, not " suffer us to go 
aw T ay," but " send us away into the herd of 
swine." 
Chap, ix. In the ninth chapter the following changes 
v. 8. may be noted as worthy of regard. In v. 8 

for the " marvelling" of the multitudes we 
v. 13. ought to read " they were afraid." In v. 13 
the words of our Lord are simply, '" for I came 
not to call the righteous, but sinners." 1 In 
v. 35. v. 35 the words "among the people," which 
might limit our Lord's miracles of mercy to 
the theocratic nation, have no right to claim 
v. 36. their place. And in v. 36 the reading " be- 
cause they fainted" will give way to one 
more suitable to the circumstances of the case, 
" because they were distressed." 
Chap. x. In the tenth chapter, v. 4 ought to present 
v. 4. the reading, "Simon the zealot" not "Simon 

v. 23. the Canaanite." In v. 23 the true reading is 
not " flee ye into another," but " flee ye into 
the next," thus bringing out the mode in 
which the persecuted disciples were in their 

1 Comp. p. 144. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 177 

flight not so much to seek safety for them- 
selves, as rather new and successive fields of 
labour, that they might thus go over as many 
as possible of the cities of Israel before the 
v. 25. Son of Man should come. In v. 25 the true 
reading is not " if they have called/' but u if 
they have surnamed the master of the house 
Beelzebub." 
Chap. xi. In the eleventh chapter the mention of 
v. 2. "two" of John's disciples in v. 2 ought to be 

omitted, for we are only told that John sent 
v. 19. "by his disciples." In v. 19 the statement 
of the true text is, not that " Wisdom is justi- 
fied of her children," but that "Wisdom is 
v. 23. justified by her works;" 1 and in v. 23 the 
graphic force of the Saviour's appeal is greatly 
heightened if we read, with what appears to be 
the best authenticated text, interrogatively, 
" And thou, Capernaum, shalt thou be exalted to 
heaven ? Thou shalt be brought down to hell." 
Chap. xii. In the twelfth chapter little change of im- 
v. 6. portance is necessary. We note only in v. 6 

the substitution of the neuter for the mascu- 
line, not " in this place is one greater than 
the temple," but " that which is greater than 
v. 8. the temple is here;" in v. 8 the omission of 

v. 35. " even ; " and in v. 35 the substitution of 
" out of his good treasure" for " out of the 
good treasure of the heart," a change by which 

1 Comp. p. 156. 
M 



178 Effect produced hy Textual Criticism upon the 

the contrast between the good and the evil 
man is more distinctly brought to view. 

Chap. xiii. In the thirteenth chapter also little change 
is needed. The words " to hear" are to be 

v. 9. omitted in v. 9, and the verse ought to read 

?;. 22. " He that hath ears let him hear." In v. 22 
"the care of this world" ought to give way to 

v. 34. " the care of the world." In v. 34 " and with- 
out a parable spake He not unto them" ought 
to be read " and without a parable spake He 

v. 43. nothing unto them." In v. 43 the same change 
has to be made as in v. 9 ; and lastly, for 

v. 55. " Joses" in v. 55 we ought to read " Joseph;" 
a reading of no small interest in connection 
with an inquiry that cannot be entered upon 
here, as to the personality of James the 
writer of the Epistle of James in our New 
Testament canon. 

Chap. xiv. In the fourteenth chapter two slight changes 

v. 12. meet us in v. 12, where "the corpse" ought to 
be substituted for " the body," and " buried 

v. 25. him" for "buried it." In v. 25 " Jesus came 
unto them " is better vouched for than " Jesus 

v. 30. went unto them;" and in v. 30 the word 
" boisterous " ought to be omitted. 

Chap. xv. In the fifteenth chapter a slight change of 

v. 1. reading ought to be made in v. 1, giving us, 

instead of u Then came to Jesus scribes and 
Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem," " Then 
come to Jesus from Jerusalem, Pharisees and 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 179 

v. 6. scribes." The omission of some words in v. 6 

supplies the reading " He shall not honour his 
father," instead of " And honour not his father 
or his mother, he shall be free ; " and again in 

v. 8. v. 8 another omission of some words gives us 

simply " This people honoureth me with their 

v. 14. lips, but their heart is far from me." In v. 14 
we ought to read " they be blind leaders," 
rather than "they be blind leaders of the 

v. 17. blind;" and in v. 17 "not" falls to be sub- 
stituted for " not yet." 

Chap. xvi. Tn the sixteenth chapter the words " ye 

v. 3. hypocrites " of v. 3 have properly no place in 

the text, nor the description of Jonah as " the 

vv. 4, 8. prophet " in v. 4. In v. 8 we ought to read 
" because ye have no bread," and not " because 

v. 13. ye have brought no bread." In v. 13, for 
" Whom do men say that I the Son of Man 
am ?" the true text gives us, " Who do men say 

v. 20. that the Son of Man is ? " In v. 20 the word 

v. 26. "Jesus" ought to be omitted; and in v. 26, 
"for what shall a man be profited ?" is better 
established than " for what is a man profited ?" 

Chap. xvii. In the seventeenth chapter the words of 

v. 4. Peter in v. 4 are much more characteristic 

when we adopt the true text — not "let us make 
here," but " I will make here three tabernacles." 

v. 11. In v. 11 the word "first" ought to go out. 

v. 20. In v. 20 we are to read " because of your little 
faith" rather than " because of your unbelief ; " 



180 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 21. and the whole of v. 21, "Howbeit this kind 

goeth not out but by prayer and fasting," is to 

be omitted. 

Chap, xviii. In the eighteenth chapter the whole of 

ot. 11,15. v. 11 ought to disappear; and in v. 15 the 

precept of our Lord receives far greater breadth 

by the omission of the words " against thee/' 

an omission demanded by the evidence. In 

v. 29. v. 29 we ought also to omit "at his feet;'' and 

v. 35. v. 35 ought to close with the word " brother," 

" if ye forgive not every one his brother." 
Chap. xix. In the nineteenth chapter the first change 
v. 17. of importance that meets us is at v. 17, which 
ought to be read, "Why askest thou me con- 
cerning that which is good ? There is one 
that is good. But if thou wouldest enter into 
v. 20. life keep the commandments." In v. 20 the 
words "from my youth up" ought to be 
v. 29. omitted; and in v. 29 the words "or wife." 
Chap. xx. In the twentieth chapter the last clause of 
v. 7. v. 7 ought to have no place in the text, " and 

whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive;" 
and the same observation applies to the last 
v. 16. clause of v. 16, "for many be called, but few 
v. 19. chosen." In v. 19 the true reading supplies 
the words "and the third clay He shall be 
raised up," rather than "and the third day 
v. 22. He shall rise again." In v. 22 we ought to 
omit the words " and to be baptized with the 
baptism that I am baptized with," a remark 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 181 

v. 23. applying also to the similar clause in v. 23. 
vv. 26, 27. In vv. 26, 27 the imperative form " let him be" 
ought to be changed for the future form 
v. 34. " shall be ;" and in v. 34, instead of reading of 
the blind men just healed that " their eyes 
received sight," we ought to read " they re- 
ceived their sight." 
Chap. xxi. In the twenty-first chapter one change only 
v. 38. need be noted, where in v. 38 the husbandmen 
are made to exclaim, " Come, let us kill him, 
and let us keep his inheritance." 
Chap. xxii. In the twenty-second chapter we ought to 
v. 13. read in v. 13, with the omission of a few words 
from the present text, " Bind him hand and 
v. 23. foot, and cast him," etc. In v. 23 we are not 
told of "Sadducees which say," as if the pur- 
pose were to describe the tenets of the sect, 
but of " Sadducees saying," the remark being 
confined to the particular persons introduced 
v, 40. to us. In v. 40 the true text gives, " on these 
two commandments hangeth the whole law 
v. 44. and the prophets ; " and in v. 44 the words 
given as a quotation from the 110th Psalm are, 
" till I put thine enemies under thy feet." 
Chap), xxiii. In the twenty-third chapter the word "for" 
v. 5. ought to be inserted in v. 5 before "they make 

v. 7. broad their phylacteries." In v. 7 "Babbi" 

v. 8. ought to be read only once ; and in v. 8 the 

words "even Christ" have to be omitted. The 
vv. 14, 17. whole of v. 14 ought to go out. In v. 17 we 



182 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

ought to read not of the temple " which sanc- 

tifieth," but of the temple " which hath sancti- 

v. 19. fied the gold;" and lastly, in v. 19 the words 

" ye fools" have no claim to be in the text. 
Chap. xxiv. In the twenty-fourth chapter the words 
v. 7. " and pestilences " in v. 7 have to be left out. 

v. 17. In v. 17 we ought to read, not of taking " any- 
thing," but of taking " the things " out of the 
v. 28. house. At the beginning of v. 28 "for" must 
v. 36. be omitted ; and the latter part of v. 36 ought 
to read, " no, not the angels of heaven, neither 
the Son, but the Father only." 
Chap. xxv. In the twenty-fifth chapter the w r ord "for" 
v. 3. ought to be inserted at the beginning of v. 3. 

v. 6. In v. 6 the w^ord " cometh " has to be omitted 

after " bridegroom," 1 and the same remark has 
v. 13. to be made of the last words of v. 13, which 
properly closes with the word " hour." In v. 
v. 31. 31 w 7 e ought to read simply of "angels," not 
v. 41. " holy angels ;" and the words of v. 41 are not 
"depart from me, ye cursed," but "depart from 
me, accursed." 
Chap. xxvi. In the tw^ntj^-sixth chapter there is no 
v. 3. mention of "the scribes" in v. 3. In v. 26 we 

v. 26. ought to read that Jesus took a " loaf," not 
v. 27. "bread; " in v. 27 that He took " a cup," not 
v. 28. "the cup;" and in v. 28 that He spoke only 
of the "testament," or rather covenant, "in His 
blood," without describing it as "new." In 

1 Comp. p. 5. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 183 

v. 43. v. 43 the change to be made is important, as 

throwing light on the feelings of the disciples 

at the solemn moment referred to, for we ought 

to read that Jesus "came again and found them 

asleep/' not that He " came and found them 

asleep again ; " their sleep had most probably 

v. 55. continued from the first. In v. 55 the w T ords 

v. 59. " with you" have to be omitted; and in v. 59 

v. 65. the words "and elders." In v. 65 the horror 

of the high priest comes out more forcibly 

when we notice that the last clause of the verse 

ought to read, "behold, now ye have heard 

the," rather than "His, blasphemy;" and in v. 

v. 74. 74 the true reading tells us not that St. Peter 

began to " curse," but that he " began to bind 

himself under a curse," or "to affirm upon oath." 

Cliav. xxvii. In the twenty-seventh chapter the name 

v. 2. "Pontius" prefixed in v. 2 to " Pilate" has to 

v. 5. be dropped. In v. 5 an important emendation 

of the text is found in the change of " in the 

temple" into "into the temple." The part of 

the temple here alluded to is the Holy place, 

into which none but the priests might enter. 

Judas therefore could not be within "the 

temple," but in his remorse and despair he 

rushed to the entrance and cast into the sacred 

in closure his ill-gotten gains, the price of his 

v. 23. Eedeemer's blood. In v. 23 "he" ought to be 

v. 34. substituted for " the governor ;" and in v. 34 

v. 35. "wine" for " vinegar." The whole of v. 35, 



184 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

after " casting lots," has to be omitted ; and in 
v. 42. v. 42 the scornful cry of the people is enhanced 

by the true reading, not " if He be the King of 

Israel," but simply "He is the King of Israel." 
v. 64. Finally, in v. 64 the words " by night " have 

no proper place. 
Chap, xxviii. In the twenty-eighth chapter the changes 

to which attention need be called are few. In 
v. 2. v. 2 the words " from the door " are to be left 

v. 9. out; in v. 9 the words " as they went to tell 

v. 20. His disciples;" 1 and in v. 20 the word " Amen." 

Gospel of St. Maek. 

Chap. i. In the first chapter of this Gospel w T e must 

v. 2. read in v. 2 for " as it is written in the pro- 

phets " the words "as it is written in Isaiah the 
prophet," while the two last words of the verse, 

v. 11. "before Thee," must be omitted. In v. 11 
" in Thee I am well pleased," takes the place of 

v. 14. " in whom I am well pleased." In v. 14 we 
find the interesting expression " the Gospel of 
God," instead of " the Gospel of the kingdom 

v. 24. of God." In v. 24 the first words of the man 
with the unclean spirit, " Let us alone," have 

v. 27. no proper place in the text; and in v. 27 the 
changes to be made on the original lend a 
power and vividness to the description not 
otherwise possessed by it, when the people in 
their amazement are represented as exclaim- 

1 Comp. p. 112. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 185 

ing, " What is this ? A new teaching ! With 
authority commandeth He even the unclean 
spirits, and they do obey him." 

Chap. ii. In the second chapter a graphicness similar 

v. 7. to that spoken of in i. 27 is lent to v. 7, when 

we read, as required by the evidence, "Why 
doth this man thus speak? He blasphemeth." 

v. 16. In v. 16 we ought to find the singular expres- 
sion, throwing fresh light upon the different 
parties then existing in Jerusalem, " and when 
the scribes of the Pharisees saw him eat," etc. 

v. 17. In v. 17 the two last words, "to repentance," 

v. 20. must be left out. In v. 20 our Lord's words 
receive new emphasis by the true reading, " in 
that day " instead of" in those days ; " and the 
same remark is applicable to the best authen- 

v. 22. ticated text of v. 22, where we ought to read, 
not " and the wine is spilled, and the bottles 
will be marred," but " and the wine perisheth, 

v. 26. and the bottles." Finally, v. 26 is rendered 
more definite by the correct reading, " in the 
days when Abiathar was high priest." 1 

Chap. iii. In the third chapter little change is needed. 

v. 15. We note only that in v. 15 the power of cast- 
ing out devils is alone spoken of in the true 

v. 18. text; that in v. 18 we are told of " Simon the 
zealot," not of "Simon the Canaanite;" and that 

v. 29. in v. 29 our Lord's words are not, that he who 
blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost is "in 

1 Comp. p. 144. 



186 Effect produced ly Textual Criticism upon the 

danger of eternal damnation/' but that he is 
" guilty of an eternal sin." 1 

Chap. iv. In the fourth chapter we are told in v. 1 not 

v. 1. only of "a great "but of " a very great multitude." 

v. 10. In v. 10 the true reading is valuable in its bear- 
ing upon the fragmentary nature of our Gospels, 
"asked of Him the parables/' not "the parable." 

v. 12. In v. 12 we ought to read, not "lest at any time 
they should be converted, and their sins should 
be forgiven them," but, with a special reference 
to the point immediately in hand, "lest at any 
time they should be converted, and it should 

v. 40. be forgiven them." In v. 40 we ought to read, 
not "How is it that ye have no faith?" but, 
"Have ye not yet faith?" 

Chap. v. In the fifth chapter the changes that require 
to be made are few and unimportant. We 

v. 18. mention only that, at v. 18, the Evangelist tells 
us that the man just cured came to our Lord not 
so much " when He was come into," as " when 
He was entering into the ship;" and that at 

v. 36. v. 36 the relation of all the parties spoken of 
to one another is better brought out by attend- 
ing to what appears to have been the- original 
statement of the Evangelist, " but Jesus, 
heeding not the word that was spoken, saith 
unto the ruler," etc. 

Chap, vi, In the sixth chapter a true reading in v. 2 

v. 2. brings out more clearly that effect of our 

1 Comp. p. 158. 



Text of the Nero Testament in its successive Books. 187 

Lord's words on the people, upon which it is 
characteristic in St. Mark to dwell with a pecu- 
liar emphasis, not " many hearing/' but " the 
many hearing Him were astonished." In v. 

v. 11. 11 the latter half, from " verily I say unto you," 

v. 15. ought to be omitted. The difficulty of v. 15 
is at once removed by reading with the correct 
text, " It is a prophet as one of the prophets ;" 
and the still greater difficulty of the second 

v. 20. last clause of v. 20 is equally removed, while the 
strangely mingled elements in the character of 
Herod are at the same time powerfully brought 
out, when we read, not " and when he heard 
Him he did many things," but, as we ought to 
read, " and when he heard Him he was greatly 

v. 38. perplexed." In v. 38 the love of graphic delin- 
eation so characteristic of St. Mark, receives 
fresh illustration by the omission falling to be 
made of the copida between "go " and " see," 
not " go and see," but " go ; see." 

Chap. vii. In the seventh chapter the close of v. 4 

v. 4. ought to read simply " as the washing of cups, 

and pots, and brasen vessels," all mention of 
" tables " being omitted. The latter half of v. 

v. 8. 8 ought likewise to be omitted, the verse clos- 

ing with "the tradition of men." At the 

v. 12. beginning of v. 12 the word " and " has no 
claim to be in the text, and it will be observed 
that, by omitting it, v. 12 will so connect itself 
with v. 11 as to render the long clause in ita- 



188 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

lies at the close of the latter verse unnecessary. 

v. 16. The whole of v. 16 wants authority; and in 

v. 19. v. 19 our Lord's words end with the word 
" draught/' after which the Evangelist makes 
the striking and beautiful comment upon what 
he has recorded, " this He said, making all 
meats clean." 

Chap. viii. In the eighth chapter any changes required 
are few and unimportant. The chief are as 

v. 21. follows. In v. 21 the question of our Lord 
ought to have the simpler form, " Do ye not 

v. 26. yet understand ? " In v. 26 the last clause falls 
to be omitted, and the charge of Jesus to the 
man whom he had cured is only " do not even 

v. 37. go into the town ;" while v. 37, connected with 
the preceding verse by " for " instead of " or," 
assigns a reason why the whole world should, 
as compared with the soul, be spoken of as 
valueless, " For what shall a man give in 
exchange for his soul V 

Chap. ix. In the ninth chapter the first change re- 
quired is one that may justly be regretted, 
depriving us as it does of one of those expres- 
sions of St. Mark by which the graphicness of 
his style of narrative is illustrated. It occurs 

v. 3. in v. 3, where the words " as snow " must be 

omitted, and the loss is only partially compen- 
sated for by the fact that the word " so " ought 
to be inserted before white, " so as no fuller on 

v. 19. earth can so white them." In v. 19 the words 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 189 

of our Lord ought to appear as an answer not 
only to the father of the child but to the whole 
assemblage, " He answereth them/' not " him, 
v. 20. and saith." In v. 20 the proper reading re- 
quires a stronger word than "tare ;" we must 
v. 23. read " tare him greatly." In v. 23 we gain by 
noting the correct words even more than we 
lost in v. 3. The word " believe " goes out, 
and -"if thou canst " is not the direct language 
of Jesus ; it is the taking up on the part of 
Jesus of the father's " if thou canst " in the 
preceding verse. The father says, v. 22, "if 
thou canst do anything ;" then Jesus replies, 
" If thou canst ! all things are possible unto 
v. 24. him that believeth." In v. 24, however, we 
again lose something by the loss of "with 
v. 26. tears " and " Lord." In v. 26 we ought to 
v. 29. read " the many" instead of " many ;" in v. 29 
v. 42. to omit " and fasting ;" in v. 42 to insert 
v. 44. "great" before "millstone." Two verses, v. 44 
vv. 46, 47. and v, 46, go out wholly ; and in v. 47 the 
last word of the verse, " fire," must be omitted. 
Chap. x. In the tenth chapter only one or two changes 
v. 21. need be noted. In v. 21 the words " take 
v. 29. up the cross " are to be left out. In v. 29 the 
correct reading presents us with a slightly 
different order in the mention of the relatives 
there spoken of, while one of them, " or wife," 
v. 50. has to be altogether omitted. In v. 50 we 
ought to find St. Mark's more graphic touch 



190 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

in the words, " and he, casting away his gar- 
ment, leapt up, and came to Jesus." 
Chap. xi. In the eleventh chapter the word " fields " 
v. 8. requires to be substituted in v. 8 for " trees," 

and thus its true rendering can be given to 
the Greek word translated in our version 
" branches." That word properly applies to 
leaves, and its true sense is much more suitable 
to the act described. To have thrown down 
branches in the path of the ass on which our 
Lord was riding could only have checked its 
v. 10. progress. In v. 10 we ought to read without 
the words " in the name of the Lord." In v. 
v. 24. 24 it is not " believe that ye receive," but 
v. 26. " believe that ye received them ;" and v. 26 

ought to be omitted. 
Chap. xii. In the twelfth chapter the true reading of v, 
?;. 4. 4 is simpler than in our text, " and him they 

wounded on the head and handled shamefully." 
v. 22. So also in v. 22, " and the seven left no seed." 
v. 23. In v. 23 the tautology is removed by the cor- 
rect reading, which omits " when they shall 
v. 27. rise;" and in v. 27 the increased terseness of 
the true text at once commends itself, "ye 
v. 31. greatly err." In v. 31 a certain amount of 
embarrassment is removed by omitting, as we 
ought to do, any mention of likeness between 
the two commandments spoken of, and by 
reading only " and the second is this." In v. 
v. 33. 33 the words " and with all the soul " go out; 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 191 

v. 43. and in v. 43 the vividness of the picture is 
preserved by our finding in the best authenti- 
cated text, not " all they which have cast/' but 
" all they which are casting into the treasury." 
Chap. xiii. In the thirteenth chapter a slight change in 
v. 3. the reading of v. 3 affords a fresh illustration 

of the character of St. Peter. It is not " Peter, 
and James, and John, and Andrew asked him 
privately," but " Peter asked him privately, 
v. 8. and James, and John, and Andrew." In v. 8 

the copulas ought to be omitted, together with 
the words " and troubles," the true reading of 
the verse giving us in English, " For nation 
shall rise against nation, kingdom against 
kingdom ; there shall be earthquakes in divers 
v. 11. places ; there shall be famines." In v. 11 the 
abuse so often made of the precept of Jesus 
contained there, is greatly obviated by the 
omission which should be made of " neither do 
v. 14. ye premeditate." In v. 14 the words " spoken 
of by Daniel the prophet" are to be left out ; 
v. 18. and in v. 18 there is no mention of " flight " in 
what appears to be the true text, " and pray ye 
that it be not in the winter." 
Chap. xiv. In the fourteenth chapter the word "for" is 
to be substituted for " but" at the beginning of 
vv. 2, 9. v. 2, and in v. 9 "the," not "this," ought to pre- 
v. 22. cede the word " gospel." In v. 22 " Take" is to 
^.23. be read instead of "Take, eat;" in v. 23 "a cup" 
v. 24. is to be substituted for " the cup ;" and in v. 24 



192 Effect produced ly Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 27. the word " new" is to be omitted. In v. 27 we 
are to omit " because of me this night." In v. 
v. 40. 40 the correct reading has the same importance 
in its bearing upon the conduct of the disciples 
as that already noticed at Matt. xxvi. 43, not 
" He found them asleep again/' but " He again 
found them sleeping ; " and the reason given 
is not merely that " their eyes were heavy," but 

v. 51. that they were "very heavy." In v. 51 we 
are to read " and they laid hold on him," instead 
of " and the young men laid hold on him ; " 

v. 70. and in v. 70 the words of the bystanders to St. 
Peter close with " Galilean," the remainder of 
the verse, " and thy speech agreeth thereto," 
having no sufficient authority. 

Chap. xv. In the fifteenth chapter, the words of Pilate 

v. 4. in v. 4 are not " behold how many things they 

witness against Thee," but " how many things 

v. 8. they accuse Thee of." In v. 8 the multitude 

is not represented as " crying aloud " but as 
" going up," in all probability to the tribunal 

v. 14. upon which Pilate sat. In v. 14 "the more" 
is to be left out before " exceedingly ; " and the 

vv. 28,30. whole of v. 28 is to be omitted. In v. 30 we 
ought to read "save Thyself, coming down from 

v. 45. the cross ; " and in v. 45 we are told of " the 
corpse " instead of " the body." 

Chap. xvi. In the sixteenth chapter the word " quickly" 

v. 8. is to be omitted in v. 8. The whole of the 

vv. 9-20. following passage from v. 9 to the end of the 



Text of the Nevj Testament in its successive Books. 193 

chapter, can hardly be regarded as a part of 
the original Gospel of St. Mark. It is rather 
an addition that had been made to it at a very 
early age, but whether in the lifetime of the 
Evangelist or not, it is impossible to say. 
Although, however, not from the pen of St. 
Mark himself, it was so soon and so generally 
recognised by the Church as possessed of can- 
onical authority, that no hesitation need be 
felt at allowing it to stand. When we have it 
where it is, the changes produced on it by the 
application of the principles of textual criticism 
are not sufficiently important to require notice. 
Before leaving this Gospel Ave have only to 
add, that it contains many narrative passages 
in which the present ought to be substituted 
for the past tense ; and that the word " straight- 
way " or " immediately" has several times been 
lost sight of in the text received by us. Correc- 
tion of the text on these two points is important, 
as increasing the vividness of the narration, and 
as illustrating the peculiarities of St. Mark. 

Gospel of St. Luke. 

Chap. i. In the first chapter of this Gospel the clos- 
v. 28. ing words of v. 28, "blessed art thou among 
v. 29. women," have to be omitted, and in v. 29 " when 
v. 42. she saw him," as formerly noticed. 1 In v. 42 
Elisabeth is represented as speaking out with "a 

1 See p. 6. 
N 



194 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

loud cry/' rather than with "a loud voice." 
v. 66. In v. 66 the last words ought to be connected 
with those going immediately before by the 
substitution of " for indeed " for " and ;" and in 
v. 75. v. 75 the true expression is simpler than that 
of the English version, " all our days " instead 
of " all the days of our life." 
Chap. ii. In the second chapter we ought to read in 
v. 5. v 5 of Mary "his betrothed" rather than of 

Mary " his espoused wife." The angels' song 
v. 14. in v. 14 takes the interesting form, " Glory to 
God in the highest, and on earth peace among 
men of his good pleasure," i.e. among men 
v. 33. whom He hath loved. 1 In v. 33 the Evange- 
list's statement is not that "Joseph and his 
mother," but that " his father and mother mar- 
velled at those things which were spoken of 
v. 38. him." In v. 38 " God " ought to be substi- 
tuted for " the Lord," and " the redemption of 
Jerusalem " for " redemption in Jerusalem." 
v. 40. In v. 40 the words " in spirit " have to 
v. 43. be omitted ; and in v. 43 a correction similar 
to that in v. 33 has to be made, " his parents " 
being substituted for " Joseph and his mother." 
Chap. iii. In the third chapter little change need be 
w. 10,12, noted. In v. 10, 12, and 14 we ought to read 
14. " what must we do " for " what shall we do." 
v. 17. In v. 17 the object of the "fan" is described 
when we read with the best authenticated 

1 Comp. pp. 94, 160. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 195 

text, " whose fan is in His hand, thoroughly to 
v. 19. purge His floor;" and in v. 19 " his brother's 
wife " is better established than " his brother 
Philip's, wife/' 
Cliap. iv. In the fourth chapter it is better to read in 
v. 1. v. 1 "in the wilderness/' than "into the wil- 

o. 2. derness/' and in v. 2 to omit " afterward." In 

v. 4. v. 4 our Lord's reply to Satan is simply " that 

man shall not live by bread alone," the words 
that follow having no claim to their place in 
the text. No mention of a " high mountain " 
v. 5. belongs to v. 5, the simple statement being 

that " the devil led him up and showed him 
v. 8. all the kingdoms/' etc. In v. 8 we must omit 

v. 18. " Get thee behind me, Satan, for ;" in v. 18 " to 
v. 41. heal the broken-hearted ;" and in v. 41 the 
v. 43. word " Christ" In v. 43 the correct reading- 
gives us, " for therefore was I sent " rather 
than " for therefore am I sent." 
Chap. v. In the fifth chapter the words " by him" in 
vv. 15,17. v. 15 are to be omitted ; and in v. 17 we ought 
to read " the power of the Lord w r as present to 
his healing them." The opening words of v. 
v. 30. 30 are "But the Pharisees and their scribes;" 
v. 33. and in v. 33 by omitting " wl^ do " w 7 e have a 
statement made, not a question asked. In v. 
6*. 36. 36 the changes requiring to be made lend a 
fresh light altogether to the verse, " and he 
spake also a parable unto them ; iSTo man rend- 
eth a piece from a new garment and putteth it 



196 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

upon an old, else he will both rend the new, 

and the piece from the new will not agree 

with the old." A double mischief, it will be 

observed, is thus spoken of by our Lord. The 

unnatural mixture destroys both the old and 

the new, just as, in the next verse, the new 

wine is spilled and the old bottles perish. In 

v. 38. v. 38 the words " and both are preserved," 

are to be omitted, and in like manner the 

v. 39. word " straightway " in v. 39. Finally, in 

this last verse " good " ought to be read for 

" better." 

Chap. vi. In the sixth chapter the difficult expression 

v. 1. of v. 1, " on the second sabbath after the first," 

must yield to the more intelligible "on a sabbath 

v. ID. day." In v. 10 we ought to leave out " whole 

v. 17. as the other." In v. 17 we have to substitute 

" a great company" for "the company" of His 

v. 25, disciples. In v. 25 the word " now " has to be 

v. 36. inserted before " full." In v. 36 the two 

words " therefore " and " also " have to be 

v. 42. omitted, and in v. 42 the word " either." In 

v. 48. v. 48 we must substitute in the last clause, 

" it was well built " for " it was founded upon 

a rock." 

Chap. vii. In the seventh chapter the last words of 

v. 10. v. 10, " that had been sick," must be omitted. 

v. 11. In v. 11 we ought to read " His disciples" 

v. 19. for "many of His disciples." In v. 19 "to the 

Lord " ought to be substituted for " to Jesus," 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 197 

v. 22. and in v. 22 for "Jesus " we should read " He." 

v. 28. In v. 28 "for" at the beginning of the verse 

goes out, and the words that follow, " I say 

unto you," are, " among those that are born of 

Avomen there is not a greater than John." In 

v. 38. v. 38 the true text makes the meaning clearer, 

" and stood behind at His feet, weeping." In 

v. 42. v. 42 the words "Tell me" must be omitted; 

v. 44. and in v. 44 the correct text gives us only 

" with her hair '" instead of " with the hairs of 

her head." 

Chap. viii. In the eighth chapter "unto them" ought to 

vv. 3, 12. be read for " unto him" in v. 3, and in v. 12 

"they that have heard" for "'they that hear." 

In v. 24 " then he awoke " is to be read for 

. "then he arose." In vv. 26 and 37 "Gerasenes" 

is to be substituted for " Gadarenes," and in 

v. 27 " for a long while had worn no clothes" 

for " and ware no clothes." In v. 45 the last 

clause, " and sayest thou, Who touched me ? " 

has to be omitted, and in v. 48 the words " be 

of QXDod comfort." In v. 52 "for" ouoht to be 

inserted after "Weep not;" and in v. 54 the 

clause relating to Christ's putting them all out 

has to be removed, for we read only, " and He 

took her by the hand and called, saying, Maid, 

arise." 

Chap. ix. In the ninth chapter we ought to read in 

vv. 1, 3. v. 1 " He called the twelve together." In v. 3 

" a staff" is to be substituted for " staves." In 



V. 


24. 


vv. 26,3 


v. 


27. 


V. 


45. 


V. 


43. 


V. 


52. 


V. 


54. 



198 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 7. v. 7 the words "by him" are to be omitted. 

v. 10. In v. 10 the true reading of the last half of 

the verse is only " and he took them, and 

went aside privately into a city called Beth- 
p. 11. saida." In v. 11 we are told, not that Jesus 

"received/' but that he "welcomed" them. 
v. 35. In v. 35 the words spoken out of the cloud 
v. 48. are, " This is my chosen Son/' In v. 48 the 

last words are, the same " is," not " shall be," 
v. 49. great. In v. 49 the words of John imply not 

so much that he succeeded in forbidding as 

that he made the effort to forbid, " and we 
v. 50. were forbidding him/'* In v. 50 "'you" is to 

be twice substituted for "us" in the last clause ; 
v. 57. and in v. 57 the word " Lord" is to be left out. 
Chap. x. In the tenth chapter " to our feet " is to be 
v. 11. substituted for " on us " in v. 11. In v. 15 we 
■v. 15. have the same change to make as that already 

made on Matt. xi. 23, "And thou, Capernaum, 

shalt thou be exalted to heaven ? Thou shalt 
v. 19. be thrust down to hell." In v. 19 we ought to 
v. 20. read " I have given" for " I give ;" in v. 20 to 
?;. 21. omit " rather" before " rejoice ;" and in v. 21 to 

substitute " in the Holy Spirit" for "in spirit." 
v. 35. In v. 35 the words " when he departed" have 
v. 39. no claim to be in the text ; and in vv. 39 and 
v. 41, 41 "the Lord's" and "the Lord" ought to 

take the place of " Jesus' " and " Jesus." 
Chap. xi. In the eleventh chapter, the form of the 

Lord's prayer must undergo considerable mo- 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 199 

dification, for several clauses ought to "be 

v. 2. omitted — in v. 2, " which art in heaven/' to- 

gether with the first word " our," and the third 
petition, " Thy will be clone, as in heaven, so in 

v, 4z. earth ; " while we must again omit in v. 4 

v. 29. " but deliver us from evil." In v. 29 we ought 
to read " this generation is an evil generation," 
and to omit "the prophet" after Jonas. In v. 

x. 34. 34 " thine eye " has to be substituted for " the 

v. 44. eye ; " and in v. 44 " scribes and Pharisees, 
hypocrites," must be omitted. The words of 

v, 48. Jesus in v. 48 are simply " and ye build," not 
" and ye build their sepulchres." The opening 

v. 53. words of verse 53 ought to be, "And when He 
was come out from thence ;" and all that truly 

v. 54. belongs to v. 54 is " laying wait for Him, to 
catch something out of His mouth." 

Chap. xii. In the twelfth chapter we ought to read 
only " fear not " instead of " fear not therefore" 

vv. 7,15. in v. 7; and in v. 15 to insert "all" before 

v. 29. " covetousness." In v. 29 '* And what ye shall 
drink " takes the place of " or what ye shall 

v. 31. drink." In v. 31 " His kingdom" is to be sub- 
stituted for " the kingdom of God," and " all " 
before "these things" is to be omitted. In 

v. 54. v. 54 we ought to read " in the west" for "out 
of the west ;" and the question of our Lord in 

v. 56. v. 56 is " How is it that ye do not know how 
to discern this time ?" 

Chap. xiii. In the thirteenth chapter we ought to read 



200 Effect produced hy Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 3. in v. 3 "in like manner" for "likewise;" in 

v. 15. v. 15 " ye hypocrites" for " thou hypocrite ;" in 
v. 24. v. 24 " door " for " gate," a reading by which 

the connection between that and the following 

verse is much more clearly brought out than 
v. 25. it would otherwise be. In v. 25 " Lord" ought 
v. 31. only to be read once. In v. 31 the word 

" hour" is to be substituted for " day;" and in 
v. 35. v. 35 we are to read "your house is left unto 

you " without the addition of " desolate." 
Chap. xiv. In the fourteenth chapter few changes 

worthy of notice' have to be made. At the 
v. 3. end of v. 3 "or not" ought to be inserted in 

the question of Jesus there recorded. The 
v. 5. change of "ass" into "son" in v. 5 has been 

v. 10. already noticed. 1 In v. 10 "all" has to be 
v. 17. inserted before " them;" while in v. 17 it has to 

be omitted before "things." Lastly, increased 
v. 27. force is given to v. 27, when we read that the 

follower of Jesus must bear, not " his " cross 

merely, but " his own " cross. 
Chap. xv. In the fifteenth chapter also few changes 
v. 17. are needed. In v. 17 we ought to read in the 

last clause, " and I perish here with hunger ?" 
v. 22. In v. 22 the word "quickly" ought to be added 
v. 32. to "bring forth ;" and in v. 32 " again" after 

" alive" is to be omitted. 
Chap. xvi. The sixteenth chapter also calls for little 

change. The most important is probably that 

1 Comp. page 9. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 201 

v. 9. falling to be made in v. 9, where we ought to 

read not, " that when ye fail," but " that when 

v. 18. it fails." In v. 18 " he that" ought to be sub- 

v. 21. stitutecl for " whosoever." In v. 21 we are told 

not of " the crumbs" but of " the things which 

v. 26. fell from the rich man's table;" and in v. 26 

the last clause of the verse must be read, " and 

that none may pass from thence to us." 

Chap. xvii. In the seventeenth chapter " against thee" 

v. 3. is to be omitted in v. 3 ; " in a day" after the 

v. 4z. second " seven times" in v. 4; and "him ? I 

v. 9. trow not" after "commanded" in v. 9, wdiile 

in this last verse " that servant" is also to be 

v. 21. changed into " his servant," In v. 21 the 

v. 23. second "lo" has to be omitted; and v. 23 

ought to have the simpler reading, " see 

there or here," instead of " see here ; or see 

v. 33. there." In v. 33 we are to read not "to 

save" but " to gain his life." 
Chap, xviii. In the eighteenth chapter we shall notice 
only two changes, but both important; the 
first as making intelligible what has little 
or no meaning as it stands, the second as add- 
ing interesting emphasis to the words. The 
v. 7. first is in v. 7, where for the last clause, "though 

He bear long with them," we ought to read 
" and is He long suffering in their case ?" The 
v. 28. second is in v. 28, where Peter's words run, 
" Lo, we have left our own and followed thee." 
Chap. xix. In the nineteenth chapter we ought to 



202 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 5. omit " and saw him" in v. 5 ; to read " the 

v. 20. other" for "another" in v. 20; "if these 
v. 40. shall" for " if these should" in v. 40 ; and 
"in this day" instead of "in this thy day" 
w. 42, 45. in v. 42. In v. 45 we are to read only " and 
He went into the temple, and began to cast 
out them that sold." 
Chap. xx. In the twentieth chapter " a thing" is to be 
v. 3. substituted for " one thing" in v. 3. The 

v. 13. last words of v. 13, "when they see him," are 
to be left out. The same thing is to be done 
v. 14. with " come " in v. 14 ; with " Why tempt 
v. 23. ye me ?" in v. 23 ; and with the greater por- 
v. 30. tion of v. 30, which will then only read, " and 
v. 40. the second." Lastly, in v. 40 the " and" at 
the beginning of the verse ought to give place 
to "for." 
Chap. xxi. In the twenty-first chapter the word " here" 
v. 6. ought to be inserted after "left" in v. 6; 

v. 8. while "therefore" in the last clause of v. 8 

v. 25. ought to be omitted. The latter part of v. 25 
will run, when the necessary textual correc- 
tion has been made, " distress of nations in 
perplexity at the roaring of sea and waves;" 
v. 36. and in v. 36 we shall have to replace "that 
ye may be accounted worthy" by "that ye 
may prevail." 
Chap. xxii. In the twenty-second chapter we are to 
v. 14. omit the word "twelve" in v. 14; and in v. 
v. 18. 18 to insert "from henceforth" after "drink." 



V. 


30. 


r. 


31. 


v. 


57. 


v. 


60. 


r. 


62. 


V. 


64. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 203 

In v. 30 " and sit" will give way to " and ye 
shall sit." In v. 31 we are to omit " and the 
Lord said." In v. 57, when amended, we 
must read " and he denied, saying, I know 
him not, woman;" in v. 60 "a cock" for 
"the cock;" and in v. 62 "he" for " Peter." 
Finally, in v. 64 we ought, omitting several 
words, to read " and when they had blindfolded 
v. 68. Him, they asked Him," etc.; and in v. 68 only 

" and if I also ask you, ye will not answer." 

Chap, xxiii. In the twenty-third chapter, in v. 2, the 

v. 2. best authenticated text sets before us the 

accusation against our Lord in a much more 

forcible manner than is s otherwise the case, for 

we ought to read "our nation" for "the nation," 

and to insert " and " before the last clause, 

" and saying that He Himself is Christ a King." 

In v. 6 we ought to read " it " for " Galilee ; " 

in v. 8 to omit " many things ; " in v. 15 to 

substitute " for he sent him back to us " for 

" for I sent you to him ; " in v. 23 to omit "and 

of the chief priests ;" in v. 35 to omit "with 

them ;" and to reduce v. 38 to the form, " And 

a superscription also was over Him, This is the 

King of the Jews." In v. 42 we have to omit 

" Lord ; " and in v. 51 " also Himself." 

Chap. xxiv. In the twenty-fourth chapter the last 

v. 1. clause of v. 1, " and certain others with them," 

v. 17. is to be omitted. In v. 17 our Lord's question 

ends with the words " as ye walk," and then 



V. 


6. 


V. 


8. 


V. 


15. 


V. 


23. 


V. 


35. 


V. 


38. 


V. 


42. 


V. 


51. 



204 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

the Evangelist adds "and they stood sad." In 
v. 42. v. 42 the words " and of an honeycomb " have 
v. 4:4:. no just claim to be in the text. In v. 44 the 

Saviour says, " These are my words/' etc. ; and 
v. 46. in v. 46 he says, " Thus it is written that 
v. 49. Christ should suffer," etc. In v. 49 we ought 
v. 50. to omit "of Jerusalem;" in v. 50 to read 

" towards Bethany " for " to Bethany ; " and in 
v. 53. v. 53 to omit "Amen." 

Gospel of St. John. 

Chap. i. In the first chapter of this Gospel we have to 

v. 16. change "and" at the beginning of v. 16 into 

v. 18. " for." The great change in v. 18 of " the only 
begotten Son " into " the only begotten God " 

v. 19. has already been discussed. 1 In v. 19 we ought 
to read " sent unto Him from Jerusalem priests 

v. 24. and Levites." In v. 24 the true reading, one emi- 
nently characteristic of St. John's tendency to 
return back on the beginning of his statements, 
seems to give us, " And they had been sent 

v. 27. from the Pharisees." In v. 27 w r e are to read, 
" even He that cometh after me, whose shoe's 

v. 28. latchet I am not worthy to unloose." In v. 28 
"Bethany" must take the place of "Bethabara;" 

v. 39. in v. 39 "ye shall see" of "see;" while the 
omission of " for " at the beginning of the last 
clause of this verse, is an illustration of a 
change needing to be often made in this Gospel, 

1 Comp. page 162. 



Teed of the New Testament in its successive Books. 205 

the suppression of the copula, when a short 

statement is added to what went before. In 

r. 41. v. 41 we ought to read, "Christ" instead of (( the 

v. 42. Christ;" in v. 42 " John" instead of "Jona;" 

v. 51. and in v. 51 to omit "hereafter." 1 

Cliap. ii. In the second chapter one change only need 

be noted, that of "hath eaten me up" into 

v. 17. " shall eat me up " in v. 17. 

Chap. iii. In the third chapter a very important change 

v. 13. has to be made in v. 13, where the last words 

of the verse, " which is in heaven," ought to be 

v. 16. omitted. In v. 16 we ought to read, not "His/' 

v. 17. but "the" only begotten Son;" and in v. 17 in 

like manner "the Son" takes the place of "his 

v. 25. Son." In v. 25 we are told not of a question 

between some of John's disciples and "the 

Jews," but of one between them and "a Jew." 

Chap. iv. In the fourth chapter two changes only may 

be mentioned, but both of them important. The 

v. 35. first occurs at v. 35, where the word "already" 

ought to be transferred to the next verse, 

bringing out far more beautifully the real force 

of our Lord's words, which will then run, a 

slight change being made in the form of the 

English present tense, " Lift up your eyes and 

look on the fields, that they are white unto 

harvest ; already he that reapeth is receiving 

wages and gathering fruit unto life eternal." 

v. 42. The second change is at v. 42, where, dropping 

1 Comp. p. 127. 



206 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

the words " the Christ," the Samaritans only 
say that they know that " this is indeed the 
Saviour of the world." 
Chap), v. In the fifth chapter important changes have 
also to be made. Of the first of these, the 
v. 3. omission of the last words of v. 3 and of the 

v. 4. whole of v. 4, we have already spoken. 1 The 

v. 16. next is the omission in v. 16 of " and sought to 
v. 30. slay him." Then in v. 30 we are to read " Him" 
v. 44. instead of " the Father;" and, lastly, in v. 44, 
" from God only " at the close of the verse 
ought rather to be " from the only One." 
Chap. vi. In the sixth chapter the interesting change 
v. 11. to be made on v. 11 has been already noticed. 2 
The confusion at present reigning in the pas- 
■vv. 22-24. sage, vv. 22-24, is dispelled by one or two slight 
emendations of the text, leading to the omission 
of " when" in v. 22 and of " also " in v. 24. Let 
us make these, put out the brackets of v. 23, 
and note that the "shipping" of v. 24 refers to the 
" other boats" of v. 23, and all is clear. At 
v. 40. the beginning of v. 40 " for " should be intro- 
duced instead of " and," thus binding this verse 
v. 47. to that immediately preceding. In v. 47 the 
words " on me " have to be omitted, as also in 
v. 51. v. 51 the words "which I will give" coming 
v. 58. after the word flesh. In v. 58 we ought to 
read " the fathers " for " your fathers ;" and in 
v. 65. v. 65 "the Father " instead of "my Father." 

1 Comp. page 16. 2 Comp. pages 113, 146. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 207 

v. 69. The confession of v. 69 should run, " and we 
believe and are sure that thou art the Holy 
One of God." 

Chap, vii In the seventh chapter the word "very" 

v. 26. before " Christ " in v. 26 has to be omitted, as 

v. 53. well as the whole of v. 53, which forms the 
opening verse of the story of the woman taken 
in adultery. 

Chap. viii. In the eighth chapter by far the most inter- 
esting and important change to be made is the 
exclusion from the text of St. John of the story 
of the woman taken in adultery, extending from 

w. 1-11. the first to the eleventh verse of the chapter. 
It would be foreign to the object now in hand 
to argue the question, and it is enough to say 
that this conclusion is at length adopted by all 
textual critics. At the same time there is so 
much reason to believe that the narrative is 
historical, and its beauty is so great, that it 
might with all propriety be given in a note. 

v. 14. In v. 14 the last words of the verse ought to 
be read, " but ye know not whence I come, or 

v. 46. whither I go." In v. 46 the " and " before the 
last half of the verse is to be omitted ; and in 

o. 59. v. 59 the same has to be said of the concluding- 
words, " going through the midst of them, and 
so passed by." 

Chap. ix. In the ninth chapter the emendation of the 

v. 4. text by the best authorities gives us in v. 4 

words beautifully pointing out the identifica- 



208 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

tion of the Eedeemer with His people, " We 

must work" instead of " I must work the 
v. 8. works of Him that sent me." In v. 8 we have 

to substitute "a beggar" for " blind ; " and 
v. 11. in v. 11 to read simply " Go to Siloam" for 

" Go to the pool of Siloam." Lastly, the im- 
v. 35. portant emendation has to be made in v. 35, 

" Dost thou believe on the Son of Man ? " for 

" Dost thou believe on the Son of God ? " 
Chap. x. In the tenth chapter " wdien he putteth 
v. 4. forth all his own" has to be read in v. 4 for 

" when he putteth forth his own sheep." In 
v. 14. v. 14, " and know my sheep, and am known of 

mine," must give way to "and know my sheep, 
v. 26. and my sheep know me." In v. 26 " as I said 

unto you" at the end of the verse has to be 
v. 38. omitted. In v. 38 " understand" is to be 

substituted for " believe ; " and "I in the 

Father" for " I in Him." 
Chap. xi. In the eleventh chapter not much change 

need be noted. " But I know that even now" 
v. 22. in v. 22 ought to be changed into " and now 
17.31. I know 7 ." In v. 31 " saying, she goeth" 

gives place to " supposing that she goeth ; " 
v. 41. and in v. 41 the w r ords " from the place where 

the dead w T as laid " are to be omitted. 
Chop. xii. In the twelfth chapter the wrords " which 
v. 1. had been dead " in v. 1 ought to be left out. 

v. 7. The language of our Lord in v. 7 is not " against 

the day of my burying hath she kept this," 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 209 

but " that she may keep this against the day 
of my burying." In the words of the Evange- 
v. 41. list in v. 41 " because" is to be substituted for 
v. 47. " when ; " and v. 47 ought to read " if any man 
hear my sayings, and keep them not," instead of 
" if any man hear my words, and believe not." 
Chap. xiii. In the thirteenth chapter an important 
v. 2. emendation occurs in v. 2, v 7 here we have to 

read, not " and supper being ended," but 
v. 24. " supper having begun." In v. 24 the state- 
ment of the Evangelist is more graphic than 
in our English text. It is that Simon Peter 
beckoned to John, " and saith unto him, Tell 
us who it is of whom He speaketh." 1 The 
answer of Jesus to the beloved disciple in v. 
v. 26. 26 gains also by the true reading in graphic 
power, " He it is for whom I shall dip the sop, 
and shall give it to him." 
Chap. xiv. In the fourteenth chapter the word " for " 
ought to be inserted before the last clause of 
vv. 2, 4. v. 2 ; and v. 4 ought to read, " And whither I 
v. 12. go, ye know the way." In v. 12, as in other 
passages too numerous to mention, " the 
Father " takes the place of " my Father ; " and 
v. 16. in v. 16 the verb " be " is to be substituted for 
v. 28. " abide." In v. 28 "because I go unto the 
Father " ought to be read for " because I said, 
v. 30. I go unto the Father;" and in v. 30 we are 
told of " the prince of the world " rather than 
of " the prince of this world." 
1 Comp. p. 145. 



210 Effect produced hy Textual Criticism upon the 

Chap. xv. In the fifteenth chapter " be " is to be sub- 

v. 11. stituted for "remain" in v. 11, and no other 
change in this chapter need be noted. 

Chap. xvi. In the sixteenth chapter we ought to read 

v. 16. in v. 16 "A little while and ye see me no 
more " for " a little while and ye shall not see 
me," and the last words of the verse, " because 

v. 23. I go to the Father," are to be omitted. In v. 23 
the change called for is important, for we 
ought to read "And in that day ye shall 
ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, 
Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father, He will 
give it you in my name." 

Chap. xvii. In the seventeenth chapter the last clause 

v. 4. of v. 4 is to be read not with its verb in a 

narrative tense, but in a participle, " having 
finished the work which Thou gavest me to 

v. 11. do." In v. 11 an important change in the 
connection of " name " has to be introduced, 
" Holy Father, keep them in Thy name which 
Thou hast given me," " name " belonging to the 
words that follow, not to those that precede ; 

v. 12. and the same remark applies to v. 12, " While 
I was with them" (omitting "in the world"), 
" I kept them in Thy name which Thou hast 

v. 20. given me." In v. 20 the present tense "believe " 
is to be substituted for the future "shall 

v.2\. believe;" and in v. 21 how wonderfully is 
the meaning of our Lord enhanced, and the 
thought of the spiritual nature of His kingdom 
deepened in us, when we find Him praying 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 211 

for His disciples, as the condition of the 
world's conviction, not " that they also may be 
one in us," but " that they also may be in us, 
that the world may believe that Thou hast 
sent me." 

Cliap. xviii. In the eighteenth chapter we mention 
only two changes that are demanded by the 
evidence, but how much the text is improved 
by them will be at once manifest to every 

v. 11. reader. In v. 11 we ought to find not " Put 
up thy sword into the sheath," but "Put up 

v. 20. the sword into the sheath ; " and in v. 20 we 
ought to read, not " in the temple, whither the 
Jews always resort," but "in the temple, 
whither all the Jews resort." 

Chap. xix. In the nineteenth chapter the words " by 
the law " are to be substituted for " by our 

vv. 7, 17. law" in v. 7; and in v. 17 the true reading 
gives us, " And He bearing His cross for Him- 

v. 20. self, went forth," etc. In v. 20, instead of words 
leading to the rendering of our English version, 
the best authenticated text supplies words that 
ought to be translated "for the place of the 
city where Jesus was crucified was nigh." 

Chap. xx. In the twentieth chapter there is little 

v. 16. change calling for notice to be made. In v. 16 
" Eabboni " is said to be " in the Hebrew 

v. 19. tongue;" and in v. 19 the word "assembled" 
has to go out. 

Chap. xxi. In the twenty-first chapter " immediately " 



212 Effect produced hy Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 3. ought to be omitted in v. 3; " John" to be 

vv. 15,17. substituted for " Jonas " in vv. 15 and 17; and 
v. 25. the word " Amen " in v. 25 has no claim to be 
in the text. 

The Acts of the Apostles. 

Chap. i. In the first chapter of this book the word 
v. 8. "my" ought to be substituted in v. 8 for "unto 

v. 14. me," thus giving us "my witnesses." In v. 14 the 
words " and supplication " are to 'be omitted; 
v. 15. and in v. 15 "brethren" is to be substituted 

for " disciples." 

Chap. ii. In the second chapter the words " one to 

v. 7. another " are to be omitted in v. 7 ; the word 

m22,23. " also " in v. 22; and in v. 23 "by the hand 

of the wicked " is to be substituted for " by 

v. 30. wicked hands." In v. 30 we are to read, 

" Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that 

God had sworn with an oath to him, that 

of the fruit of his loins should sit on his 

v. 40. throne." In v. 40 " them " ought to be added 

v. 41. after " exhort;" and in v. 41 "gladly" is to be 

omitted. 
Chap. iii. In the third chapter the shorter reading 
v. 11. "he" is to be adopted in v. 11 for "the lame 
v. 18. man which was healed;" and in v. 18 we are 
to read " had showed by the mouth of all the 
prophets that His Christ should suffer." In 
v. 20. v. 20 "appointed" is to be substituted for 
v. 21. "preached." In v. 21 "all" is to be omitted. 



Text of the Neio Testament in its successive Books. 213 

v. 22. In v. 22 the first clause ought to read simply 
v. 26. "Moses truly said;" and in v. 26 we are to 

leave out the word " Jesus." 
Chap. iv. In the fourth chapter we ought to read in 
v. 8. v. 8 simply of " elders/' not of " elders of 

v. 17. Israel." In v. 17 "straitly" is to be omitted. 
v. 24. In v. 24 the first words of the prayer there 

given are " Lord, Thou which hast made ; " its 
v. 25. words in v. 25 have to be changed into " who 

by the mouth of our father thy servant David 
v. 27. by the Holy Ghost hast said;" and in v. 27, " in 

this city " is to be inserted after " of a truth." 
v. 36. Lastly, " Joses " in v. 36 is to be changed into 

" Joseph." 
Chap. v. In the fifth, chapter " these things " in v. 5 is 
v. 5. to be omitted. The beginning of v. 16 ought 

v. 16. to run, " There came also the multitude from 
v. 23. the cities round about Jerusalem." In v. 23 

the words " truly " and " without" have no good 

claim to be in the text ; and the same remark 

applies to the mention of " the high priest " in 
^.24,34. v. 24. In v. 34 "men" is to be substituted 

for " apostles ; " " overthrow them " for " over- 
v. 39. throw it" in v. 39; and "the name" for "His 
v. 41. name " in v. 41. 

Chap. vi. In the sixth chapter two changes only need 
v. 8. be noted, that in v. 8 Stephen is said to have 

been full of " grace and power " rather than of 
v. 13. "faith and power; " and that in v. 13 the word 

" blasphemous " has no proper place. 



214 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

Chap. vii. In the seventh, chapter we ought to read 

v. 16. in v. 16 "Emmor in Sychem" rather than 

v. 18. "Emmor, the father of Sycliem;" in v. 18 to 

v. 22. add "over Egypt" after "arose;" in v. 22 

to insert "his" before "words and deeds;" in 

v. 30. v. 30 to omit " of the Lord " after " angel ; " in 

v. 37. v. 37 to omit the last words of the verse, " him 

v. 48. shall ye hear ; " and in v. 48 to read that the 

Most High dwelleth not "in what is made 

with hands " rather than " in temples made 

with hands." 

Chap. viii. In the eighth chapter the words in v. 10 of 

v. 10. those who gave heed to Simon are not, " This 

man is the great power of God," but "This 

man is what is called the great power of God." 

v. 12: In v. 12 " the things " after " preaching " ought 

to be omitted. Eor "the Holy Ghost" in 

v. 18. v. 18 we are to read "the Spirit;" for "pray 

0.22, God" in v. 22 "pray the Lord;" and the 

v. 37. whole of v. 37 is to be omitted. 1 

Chap. ix. In the ninth chapter the last words of v. 5 

vv. 5, 6. together with the first part of v. 6 are to be 

left out, so that we shall read "I am Jesus 

whom thou persecutest; but arise," etc. In 

v. 8. v. 8 "nothing" is to be substituted for "no 

v. 20. man;" in v. 20 "Jesus" for "Christ;" and 

v. 31. in v. 31 "the church" for "the churches," 

together with the corresponding change from 

the plural to the singular in the verbs " edified " 

and " multiplied." 

1 Comp. pp. 16, 136. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 215 

Chap. x. In the tenth chapter the last clause-of v. 6, 

v. 6. " he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do," 

v. 11. is to be left out. • In v. 11 we ought to read 
" and saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel 
descending as a great sheet, by four corners let 

v. 12. down upon the earth;" and in v. 12 the vessel 
is described as containing " all manner of four- 
footed beasts, and creeping things of the earth, 

v. 30. and fowls of heaven." In v. 30 we must read 
"Four days ago until this hour I was at the 

v. 33. ninth hour praying," etc. In v. 33 " of the 
Lord" is to be substituted for " of God;" 

v. 48. and in v. 48 " of Jesus Christ" for " of the 
Lord." 

Chap. xi. In the eleventh chapter the changes to be 
made are hardly of a kind demanding special 
notice for our present purpose. 

Chap. xii. In the twelfth chapter one change only need 
be noted, that of "to Jerusalem" for "from 

v. 25. Jerusalem" in v. 25. 

Chap. xiii. In the thirteenth chapter an interesting 
change, though the evidence is somewhat in- 

v. 18. conclusive, should probably be made in v. 18 
by the substitution of u he bore them about as 
a nurse" for " suffered he their manners." 

w. 19, 20. In vv. 19 and 20 the changes to be made lead 
to a rendering considerably different from that 
of the authorized text, " and when he had 
destroyed seven nations in Canaan, he gave 
them their land as an inheritance for about 



216 • Effect produced hy Textual Criticism upon the 

four hundred and fifty years ; and after these 
things he gave them judges until Samuel the 

v. 26. prophet." In v. 26 " us" is to be substituted 

v. 42. for "you" in the last clause. In v. 42 we 
ought to read " And when they were going 

v. 45. out they besought," etc.; and in v. 45 " con- 
tradicting and" has to be omitted. 

Chap. xiv. In the fourteenth chapter " you" is to be 
substituted for " us " and " your " for " our " 

v. 17. in v. 17. Any other changes requiring to be 
made in this chapter are unimportant. 

Chap. xv. In the fifteenth chapter "you" is to be 

v. 7. substituted for "us" in v. 7; and "them" in 

vv. 8, 11. v. 8 is to be omitted. In v. 11 we ought to 
read simply "the Lord Jesus" without the 

ml7,18. addition of " Christ." In v. 17 and 18 we are 
to read from the close of the former verse, 
"saith the Lord, Who made these things 

v. 23. known from the beginning." In v. 23 the 
letter of the Council begins " the apostles and 
the elders, (who are) brethren, send greeting." 

v. 24. In v. 24 we have first to omit " which went 
out" after "certain," and then to read the 
latter part, " subverting your souls, to whom 

v. 33. we gave no commission." In v. 33 we ought 
to read "those who had sent them" instead of 

v. 34. " the apostles ; " and v. 34 is to be omitted. In 

v. 37. v. 37 we are told that " Barnabas wished," not 
that he " determined to take with them John;" 

v. 40. and in v. 40 it is "the grace of the Lord" 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 217 

rather than "the grace of God" to which 

Paul is recommended. 

Chap. xvi. In the sixteenth chapter an interesting 

v. 7. change has to be made in v. 7, where we are 

to read in the last clause, " but the spirit of 

v. 13. Jesus suffered them not." In v. 13 the writer 

of the narrative tells us of the place by the 

river side to which they went out, that it was 

one "where we supposed that there was a 

place of prayer." The damsel possessed with 

v. 17, the spirit of divination cries in v. 17 that 
Paul and his companions show unto " you," 
not unto " us," the way of salvation ; and in 

v. 31. v. 31 the language of Paul and Silas to the 
jailer is "believe on the Lord Jesus," rather 
than " believe on the Lord Jesus Christ." 

Chap. xvii. In the seventeenth chapter we are to omit 

v. 5. in v. 5 the words " which believed not " after 

v. 26. " Jews." In v. 26 two important changes have 
to be made, by the omission first of the word 
" blood" after "one," and then of "before" after 

v. 27. "times." In v. 27 "God" is to be substituted 
for "the Lord." 

Chap, xviii. In the eighteenth chapter an important 
emendation of the text has to be introduced in 

v. 5. v. 5, where we are told, not that Paul was 

"pressed in the spirit," but that he was 

v. 21. "earnestly occupied with the word." In v. 21 
the words " must by all means keep this feast 
that cometh at Jerusalem, but" are to be left out. 



218 Effect produced hy Textual Criticism upon the 

Chap. xix. In the nineteenth chapter, in v. 4, we are to 
v. 4. read, " on Jesus " rather than " on Christ 

v. 33. Jesus;" in v. 33 "they thrust/' not "they drew, 
v. 37. Alexander out of the multitude ;" and in v. 37 

the town-clerk speaks of Diana not as " your " 

but as "our" goddess. 
Chap. xx. In the twentieth chapter the words " into 
v. 4. Asia " are to be omitted in v. 4. In v. 7 the 

word " we " is to be substituted for " the dis- 
v. 8. ciples ;" and again for " they " in v. 8. In v. 

15 the evidence seems to require the omission 

of a clause, for whose introduction into the 

text it is extremely difficult to account, 

"and tarried at Trogy Ilium." 
Chap. xxi. In the twenty-first chapter we are to omit 
v. 8. "that were of Paul's company" in v. 8 ; in 

y. 20. v. 20 to read, "they glorified God" for "they 
v. 25. glorified the Lord;" and in v. 25 to omit 

" that they observe no such thing, save only." 
Chap. xxii. In the twenty-second chapter we ought to 
v. 9. omit "and were afraid" in v. 9 ; as also "unto 

w.20,30. his death" in v. 20. In v. 30 we ought to read, 

"all the council" for "all their council." 
Chap, xxiii. In the twenty-third chapter an interesting 
v. 6. change has to be made in v. 6, " the son of 

Pharisees" for "the son of a Pharisee." At the 
v. 9. end of v. 9 we miss, in the received text, the 

graphic and abrupt termination belonging to 

the best authenticated text, in which the 

words "let us not fight against God" do not 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 219 

occur, the cry of the scribes being only " We 

find no evil in this man : but if a spirit or an 
v. 12. angel hath spoken by him — ." In v. 12 we are 

told that "the Jews," not "certain of the 

Jews," banded together. 
Chap. xxiv. In the twenty-fourth chapter the latter 
w. 6, 7. part of v. 6, the whole of v. 7, and the first part 
v. 8. of v. 8, ought to be left out, so that we pass at 

once from "whom we took" in v. 6 to "by 
v. 10. examining of whom" in v. 8. In v. 10 "the 

more" before "cheerfully" is also to be left out; 
v. 24. and in v. 24, the word " Jesus " is to be added 

to "Christ." 
Chap. xxv. In the twenty-fifth chapter we are told not 

of "the high priest," but of "the high priests" 
vv. 2, 6. in v. 2 ; and in v. 6, not of "ten," but of "eight 

or ten days." 
Chap. xxvi. In the twenty-sixth chapter we ought to 
v. 7. read in v, 7, "accused of Jews" rather than 

v. 17. "accused of the Jew^s;" in v. 17 to omit "now;" 
v. 21. and in v. 21 to omit, as w T as done in v. 7, the 

definite article before "Jews." 
Chap, xxvii. In the twenty-seventh chapter the words 
v. 2. of v. 2 have to undergo some change, " and 

entering into a ship of Adramyttium, which 

was about to sail to the coasts of Asia, we 
v. 19. launched." In v. 19 "they" has to be substi- 
v. 34. tuted for "we;" and in v. 34 "perish" for 

"fall." 
Chap, xxviii. In the twenty-eighth chapter " w T e " has 



220 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 1. to take the place of " they " in v. 1 ; and the 

v. 29. whole of v. 29 has to be left out. 

The Epistle to the Eomans. 

Chap. i. The only changes worth noticing in this 
v. 16. chapter are that in v. 16 we should read "For 
I am not ashamed of the gospel" instead of "For 
I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ ;" and 
v. 31. that in v. 31, "implacable" should be omitted. 
Chap. ii. Instead of the words "Behold, thou art 
called a Jew," in v. 17, we should read "But 
if thou art called a Jew." No other change of 
importance is required. 
Chap. iii. We should read "But if the truth" instead 
v. 7. of "For if the truth" in v. 7; and the words "and 

vl 22. upon all" in v. 22 should probably be omitted. 
Chap. iv. A remarkable various reading occurs in this 
chapter. A, B, C, N, with some other ancient 
authorities, omit "not" in v. 19, so that we 
should probably read " he considered his own 
body, now become dead," instead of " he con- 
sidered not," etc. 
Chap. v. Except the important change already noticed 
v. 1. as required in v. 1, no alteration of consequence 

is called for in this chapter. 1 

Chap. vi. In this chapter we have simply to notice 

v. 11. that "our Lord" should be omitted in v. 11 ; 

and that instead of "obey it in the lusts 

v. 12. thereof" in v. 12, we should read "obey the 

lusts thereof." 

1 Comp. p. 167. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 221 

Chap. vii. A somewhat interesting change is required 

v. 6. at v. 6. Instead of " that being dead wherein 

we were held" the words should run "we 
having died to that wherein we were held." 

v. 18. V. 18 should read thus ; "For I know that 
there dwelleth not in me, that is, in my flesh, 
any good; for to will is present with me, but 
to perform that which is good is not." 

Chap. viii. The correct reading of v. 1 has been already 
spoken of. 1 We should read " helpeth our 

v. 26. infirmity" instead of "infirmities" in v. 26, 
and, as formerly noticed " for us" in the same 
verse should be omitted." 2 

Chap. ix. No change calling for notice is required in 
this chapter. 

Chap. x. We should read " for them " instead of " for 

v. 1. Israel " in v. 1 ; and instead of the common 

v. 15. text in v. 15 there should be read, "How 
beautiful are the feet of them that brings glad 
tidings of peace, that bring glad tidings of 
good things ! " It is somewhat doubtful whether 
we should substitute "word of Christ" for 

v. 17. "word of God" in v. 17. 

Chap. xi. So, again, it is doubtful whether these words 

v. 6. in v. 6, " but if it is of works, it is no more 

grace: otherwise work is no more work" 

v. 22. should not be omitted. At v. 22, for 
" tow r ard thee, goodness" read "toward thee, 
God's goodness." 

1 Corap. p. 168. 2 Comp. p. 6. 



222 Effect produced "by Textual Criticism upon the 

Chap. xii. The only thing calling for notice in this 
chapter is that we should probably read " But" 
v. 20. or "Nay rather/' for "therefore" in v, 20, — 
" Nay rather, if thine enemy hunger, feed him." 
Chap. xiii. Instead of " the powers that be " read 
v. 1. "those that be " in v. 1, and omit the clause 

v. 9. " thou shalt not bear false witness " in v. 9. 

Chap. xiv. Instead of the words " For to this end Christ 
both died, and rose, and revived, that He might 
v. 9. be Lord both of the dead and living " in v. 9, 

read simply " For to this end Christ died and 
lived, that He might be Lord both of the dead 
v. 10. and of the living." In v. 10, for "judgment- 
seat of Christ" read "judgment-seat of God." 
Chap. xv. For " as Christ also received us " read " as 
v. 7. Christ also received you " in v. 7. Instead of 

v. 8. " Now " read " For " at the beginning of v. 8 : 

vv. 23,24. and read as follows in vv. 23, 24, "But now 
having no longer place in these parts, and 
having had these many years a longing to 
come to you, whenever I take my journey into 
v. 29. Spain ; for I hope to see you," etc. In v. 29, for 
" fulness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ" 
read simply " fulness of the blessing of Christ." 
Chap. xvi. Instead of " first-fruits of Achaia " read 
v. 5. " first-fruits of Asia " in v. 5. For " the churches 

of Christ " read " all the churches of Christ " 
v. 16. in v. 16. Instead of the words "our Lord Jesus 
v. 18. Christ read "our Lord Christ" in v. 18: and 
v. 24. probably omit v. 24 altogether. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 223 

The Fikst Epistle to the Coeixthians. 

Chap. i. In this chapter, for " that I had baptized in 
v. 15. my own name" in v. 15 read "that ye were 
v. 20. baptized in my name;" in v. 20, for "the wis- 
dom of this w r oiid " read " the wisdom of the 
world;" for "require a sign" read "require 
v. 22. signs " in v. 22 ; for " unto the Greeks " read 
v. 23. " unto the Gentiles " in v. 23 ; for " in His 
v. 29. presence" read "before God" in v. 29. 
Chap. ii. Instead of " by His Spirit " read " by the 
v. 10. Spirit" in v. 10; for "the Holy Ghost" read 
v. 13. "the Spirit" in v. 13. 

Chap. iii. Tor " who then is Paul, and who is Apollos ?" 
v. 5. in v. 5, read "what then is Paul ? and w 7 hat 

is Apollos ?" 
Chap. iv. In v. 2 insert " here " so as to read " More- 
v. 2. over, it is required in stewards here (i.e. on 

v. 6. earth) that a man be found faithful;" in v. 6, 

instead of " that ye might learn in us not to 
think of men above that which is written," 
read " that in us ye may learn this, not to go 
beyond what is written." 
Chap. v. In v. 1, for "as not so much as named among 
v. 1. the Gentiles " read " as is not even among the 

v. 7. Gentiles;" in v. 7 omit "therefore;" and in- 

stead of the words " For even Christ our pass- 
over is sacrificed for us " read " Por our pass- 
over, even Christ, w r as sacrificed for us;" omit 
v. 12. " also" in v. 12 ; and likewise omit " therefore" 
v. 13. in v. 13. 



224 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

Chap. vi. Insert " Or" at the beginning of v. 2, and 
v. 2. read, " Or do ye not know ;" and omit entirely 

v. 20. in v. 20 the words " and in your spirit, which 
are God's," reading the verse thus — "For ye 
were bought with a price ; therefore glorify God 
in your body." 1 
Chap. vii. Instead of the words "due benevolence" in 
v. 3. v. 3 read "her due;" for "that ye may give 

yourselves to fasting and prayer ; and come 
v. 5. together again" in v. 5 read, "that ye may be 

free for prayer, and may be together again ;" 
instead of "for" read "but" at the beginning 
v. 7. of v. 7; for the words "the unbelieving wife is 

v. 14, sanctified by the husband" read in v. 14 
"the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the 
(believing) brother;" for " the wife is bound by 
v. 39. the law" in v. 39 read simply " a wife is bound." 
Chap. viii. In v. 2, for "think that he knoweth anything, 
v. 2. he knoweth nothing yet" read " think that he 

knoweth anything, he knoweth it not yet ;" in 
v. 4. v. 4, for " none other God but one," read " no 

v. 7. God but one," in v. 7, for " some with con- 

science of the idol," read, " some through cus r 
tom with the idol," as the text supported by 
the oldest authorities. 
Chap. ix. In v. 1 read, " Am I not free ? am I not an 
vv. 1, 20. apostle?" in v. 20 insert "not being myself 
under the law," and read " to them that are 
under the law, as under the law, not being 

1 Comp. p. 113. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 225 

v. 23. myself under the law;" in v. 23, for "And 
this" read "And all things." 

Chap. x. In v. 10 omit "also." and read, "as some 

cv. 10,11. of them murmured ;" in v. 11, instead of "for 
ensamples," read " by way of figure :" in v. 

v. 23. 23 omit "for me," and read "all things are 

v. 24. lawful;" in v. 24 omit " every man," and read 
the verse thus: "Let no man seek his own, 

v. 28. but his neighbour's good :" in v. 28, omit the 
words repeated from v. 26, " for the earth is 
the Lord's, and the fulness thereof." 

Chap, xi. "We give at length the solemn account of the 
Lord's Supper contained in this chapter, as it 
should stand in the corrected text. The pas- 

vv. 23-29. sage vv. 23-29 will run as follows: "For I 
received from the Lord that which I also deli- 
vered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, in the 
night in which He was betrayed, took bread ; 
and when He had given thanks, He brake it, 
and said, This is my body which is for you: this 
do in remembrance of me. After the same man- 
ner the cup also, after they had supped, saying, 
This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this 
do, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. 
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink 
the cup, ye shew forth the Lord's death till He 
come. Wherefore, whosoever eateth the bread, 
or drinketh the cup of the Lord, unworthily, 
shall be guilty of the body and the blood of 
the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and 



226 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

so let him eat of the bread, and drink of the 

cup. For he that eateth and drinketh, eateth 

and drinketh judgment to himself, should he 

discern not the body." 

Chap. xii. In v. 2 insert " when," and read " Ye know 

vv. 2, 12. that w T hen ye were Gentiles;" in v. 12 omit 

" one," and read " all the members of the 

body." 

Chap. xiii. In v. 3, instead of the w^ords " though I give 

v. 3. my body to be burned," the oldest manuscripts 

read " though I give my body that I may 

boast," which some prefer. There is just a 

difference of one letter in the Greek. 

Chap. xiv. In v. 18 omit "my," and read simply "I 

vv. 18, 25. thank God;" in v. 25 omit "and thus" at 

v. 35. the beginning ; in v. 35 instead of " for 

women" read "for a woman." 
Chap. xv. In v. 20, omit "and become," and read 
v. 20. " risen from the dead, the first-fruits ;" in v. 
v. 44. 44, instead of the w T ords " There is a natu- 
ral body, and there is a spiritual body" read 
" If there is a natural body, there is also a 
v. 47. spiritual ;" in v. 47 omit the w T ords " the Lord," 
and read " the second man is from heaven ;" 
v. 55. in v. 55 substitute "0 death" for "0 grave," 
and read the verse thus — " death, where is 
thy sting ? death, where is thy victory ?" 
Chap. xvi. In v. 7, instead of "but I trust," read "for 
vv. 7, 22. I trust;" in v. 22 omit the words "Jesus 
Christ," and read " If any man love not the 
Lord, let him be," etc. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 227 

The Second Epistle to the Coeinthians. 

Chap. i. In v. 12 for " simplicity and godly sincerity" 
vv. 12,18. read "holiness and godly sincerity;" v. 18 
should be read as follows — " But God is faith- 
ful, that our word to you is not yea and nay;" 
v. 20, v. 20 is to be read thus — "For how many 
soever be the promises of God, in Him is the 
Yea : wherefore also by him is the Amen, for 
glory unto God by us." 
Chap. ii. In v. 10 read as follows — "to whom ye 
v. 10. forgive anything, I forgive also; for indeed 
what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven any- 
thing, for your sakes did I forgive it in the 
person of Christ." 
Chap. iii. Instead of the words " not in tables of stone, 
but in fleshly tables of the heart," read " not 
on tables of stone, but on fleshy tables, on 
hearts." 
Chap. iv. Omit the words "unto them" in v. 4, and 
v. 4. read, "that the light should not shine forth;" 

v. 6. instead of the words in v. 6, " For God, who 

commanded the light to shine out of darkness, 
hath shined in our hearts," read " For it is God 
who said, The light shall shine out of darkness, 
that shined in our hearts." 
Chap. v. In v. 5 omit " also," and read " who gave 
vv. 5, 12. unto us the earnest of the Spirit;" in v. 12 
omit " For," and read "we are not recommend- 
v. 17. ing;" in v. 17 omit "all," and read "behold 



228 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 21. they are become new:" in v. 21 omit "For," 

and read " Him who knew not sin He made," 

etc. 

Chap. vi. Instead of " and" read " or" in v. 14, " or 

v. 14. what communion." No further change worthy 

of notice is required in this chapter. 
Chap. vii. Instead of the words " but that our care for 
you in the sight of God might appear unto 
v. 12. you" in v. 12, read "but that your zeal for us 
might be made manifest unto you in the sight 
of God;" for the words "Therefore we are 
comforted in your comfort : yea, and exceed- 
ingly the more joyed we for the joy of Titus," 
v. 13. in v. 13, read " For this cause we are comforted, 
but in our comfort we joyed the more exceed- 
ingly for the joy of Titus." 
Chap.- viii. Instead of the words " praying us with much 
v. 4. entreaty that we would receive the gift, and 

take upon us the fellowship of the ministering 
to the saints" in v. 4, read "Praying of us 
with much entreaty the grace and the partici- 
pation in the ministering to the saints ;" in v. 
v. 12. 12 omit the words " a man," and read " that 
v. 19. which it hath ;" in v. 19, instead of the words 
" which is administered by us to the glory of 
the same Lord, and declaration of your ready 
mind," read "which is administered by us to 
the glory of the Lord, and to further our zeal." 
Chap. ix. Omit the words " confident boasting" in v. 4, 
v. 4. and read " in this confidence :" instead of " both 



Text of the Neiv Testament in its successive Books. 229 

v. 10. minister and multiply" in v. 10, read " shall 

minister and multiply." 
Chap. x. Omit the word " Christ's" at the end of v. 7, 
v. 7. and read " even so are we." No further change 

is required in this chapter. 
Chap. xi. Insert " the holiness" in v. 3, and read " from 
v. 3. the simplicity and the holiness that are towards 

Christ ; " for the words " no man shall stop me 

of this boasting in the regions of Achaia," in 
v. 10. v. 10, read " this boasting shall not be shut 

against me in the regions of Achaia." 
Chap. xii. Omit " my" in v. 9, and read " My grace is 
v. 9. sufficient for thee, for strength is made perfect 

v. 11. in weakness;" omit "in glorying" in v. 11, 

and read " I am become a fool ; " for the words 

"Again, think ye that we excuse ourselves 
v. 19. unto you?" in v. 19, read "Of a long time 

have ye been thinking that we excuse ourselves 

unto you." 
Chap. xiii. Instead of the words " though He was 
v. 4. crucified through weakness " in v. 4, read " for 

indeed He was crucified through weakness ; " 
v. 7. in v. 7, for the words " jSTow I pray to God," 

read " Now we pray to God." 

The Epistle to the Galatians. 

Chap.i. Omit "for" in v. 10, and read "if I yet 
v. 10. pleased men ; " instead of the words " to see 
v. 18. Peter" in v. 18, read "to become acquainted 
with Cephas." 



230 Effect produced hy Textual Criticism upon the 

Chap. ii. Instead of " But when Peter was come in," 

v. 11. v. 11, read "But when Cephas was come; " for 

the words " I said unto Peter before them all, 

If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner 

of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why com- 

pellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the 

v. 14. Jews ? " in v. 14, read " I said unto Cephas 

before them all, If thou being a Jew, livest, 

after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the 

Jews, how is it that thou compellest the 

Gentiles to live as do the Jews ? " 

Chap. iii. Omit the w r ords " that you should not obey 

v. 1. the truth," and " among you " in v. 1, and read 

the verse as follows — " foolish Galatians, 

who hath bewitched you, before w 7 hose eyes 

Jesus Christ w 7 as evidently set forth crucified?" 

instead of the words "the man that doeth 

v. 12. them " in v. 12, read " he that hath done 

v. 17. them;" omit the words "in Christ" in v. 17, 

and read " the covenant already confirmed by 

v. 29. God : " omit " and " in v. 29, and read " And if 

ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, 

heirs according to the promise." 

Chap. iv. Instead of "your hearts" read "our hearts" 

v. 6. in v. 6 ; omit the words " through Christ " in 

v. 7, v. 7, and read " and if a son, also an heir 

through God;" instead of the words, "And 

my temptation which was in my flesh ye 

v. 14. despised not" in v. 14, read "And your 

temptation which was in my flesh ye despised 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 231 

v. 24. not ; " omit " the " in v. 24, and read " these 
women are two covenants : " omit the words 

v. 26. "of us all" in v. 26, and read "But Jerusalem 
which is above is free, which is our mother." 

Chap. v. In v. 1 read " For liberty Christ hath made 

v. 1. us free : stand fast therefore, and be not en- 

tangled again in the yoke of bondage ; " for 

v. 16. "Walk in the Spirit" in v. 16, read "Walk 
by the Spirit ; " omit the word " adultery" in 

v. 19. v. 19. 

Chap. vi. Instead of the words " neither circumcision 

v. 15. availeth anything" in v. 15, read "neither 
circumcision is anything." 

The Epistle to the Ephesians. 

Chap. i. The reading in v. 1 was formerly noticed : l 
instead of the words " wherein He hath made 

v. 6. us accepted in the Beloved " in v. 6, read 

"which He freely bestowed upon us in the 
Beloved;" for "the eyes of your understand- 

v. 18. iug" in v. 18, read "the eyes of your heart," 
and omit " and " before "what " in the same 
verse. 

Chap. ii. Instead of " Himself" read " Him" in v. 15 : 

v. 15. insert " ye are " before " fellow-citizens " in 

v. 19. v. 19. 

Chap. iii. Instead of the words " How that by revela- 
tion He made known unto me the mystery" in 

v. 3. v. 3, read " that by revelation the mystery was 

1 Comp. page 168. 



232 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

made known to me;" for " preach among the 
v. 8. Gentiles " in v. 8, read " preach unto the 

Gentiles;" instead of "fellowship of the mys- 
v. 9. tery " in v. 9, read " dispensation of the 

mystery/' and omit the words "by Jesus 

Christ" in the end of the verse ; omit " of our 
v. 14 Lord Jesus Christ " in v. 14, and read simply 

"For this cause I bow my knees unto the 

Father;" instead of "Unto Him be glory in 
v. 21. the church by Christ Jesus " in v. 21, read 

" Unto Him be the glory in the church and in 

Christ Jesus." 
Chap. iv. Instead of "in you all" in v. 6, read sim- 
v. 6. ply "in. all;" omit "first" in v. 9, and read 

v. 9. simply "descended into;" omit "other" in 

v. 17. v. 17, and read " as the Gentiles walk." 
Chap. v. Instead of "hath loved us" in v. 2, read 
v. 2. "hath loved you;" insert "being aware" in 

v. 5. v. 5, and read " For this know, being aware ;" 

v. 9. for "Spirit" substitute "light" in v. 9, and 

read "For the fruit of the light is;" for 
v. 17. " understanding" in v. 17, read " understand;" 
v. 21. for "fear of God" in v. 21, read "fear of 

Christ;" omit the word "submitting" in v. 
v. 22. 22, and read " wives to their own husbands, 

as unto the Lord ;" instead of the words " and 
v. 23. he is the Saviour of the body" in v. 23, read 

" Himself the Saviour of the body;" instead 

of " that He might present it to Himself a 
v. 27. glorious church," in v. 27, read " that He might 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 233 

Himself present to Himself the clmrcli glori- 

v. 29. ous ;" for " the Lord" in v. 29, read " Christ ;" 

omit the words " of His flesh and of His bones" 

v. 30. in v. 30, and read simply, " because we are 

members of His body." 
Chap. vi. Instead of the words " knowing that your 
v. 9. Master also is in heaven," in v. 9, read " know- 

ing that both their Master and yours is in 
heaven;" for the words "against the rulers 
v. 12. of the darkness of this world" in v. 12, read 
" against the rulers of this darkness." 

The Epistle to the Philippians. 

Chap. i. Instead of "with the fruits" in v. 11, read 
v. 11. "with the fruit;" insert "of God" in v. 14, 
v. 14. and read " to speak the word of God ;" trans- 
w. 16, 17. pose vv. 16, 17, and read "the one from love, 
knowing that I am set for the defence of the 
Gospel ; the other preach Christ, from con- 
tentiousness, not sincerely, thinking to raise 
up affliction to my bonds ;" instead of " but 
v. 28. to you of salvation" in v. 28, read "but of 

your salvation." 
Chap. ii. Insert "also" in v. 4, and read "on the 
v. 4. things of others also;" for "let this mind be 

v. 5. in you" in v. 5, read " all of you have this 

mind in you." 
Chap. iii. Instead of the words " w 7 hich worship God 
v. 3. in the spirit" in v. 3, read " which worship 

in (or "by") the Spirit of God;" instead of 



234 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 11. the words "of the dead" in v. 11, read " from 
the dead;" instead of the words, "neverthe- 
less, whereto we have already attained, let us 
walk by the same rule, let us mind the same 

v. 16. thing " in v. 16, read " nevertheless, whereto 
we have attained, let us walk by the same 
[course]." 

Chap. iv. Instead of the words " through Christ which 

v. 13. strengtheneth me" in v. 13, read "through 
Him which strengtheneth me ; " for " be with 

v. 23. you all" in v. 23, read " be with your spirit." 

The Epistle to the Colossians. 

Chap. i. Omit " and," and read as follows in v. 6, 
v. 6. "which is present with you, as in all the world; 

it is bringing forth fruit and increasing even 
v. 7. as in you since," etc. ; omit " also" in v. 7, 

and read " as ye learned ;" and in the same 
verse, instead of " who is for you," read " who 
is for us ; " omit " through His blood " in v. 
v. 14. 14, and read " In whom we have the redemp- 
tion, the remission of sins;" for "in my 
v. 24. sufferings " in v. 24, read " in sufferings ; " for 
v. 28. " perfect in Christ Jesus " in v. 28, read 

" perfect in Christ." 
Chap. ii. Omit "of the sins" in v. 11, and read "in 
v. 11. the putting off of the body of the flesh;" in- 
stead of " having forgiven you all trespasses " 
v. 13. in v. 13, read "having forgiven us all our tres- 
passes ;" instead of the words " intruding into 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 235 

v. 18. those things which he hath not seen" in v. 18, 

read " dwelling on (insisting on) the things 

which he hath seen." 
Chap. iii. Instead of " let the peace of God rule in 
v. 12. your hearts" in v. 12, read "let the peace of 

Christ rule in your hearts ; " omit " and " in 
v. 17. v. 17, and read " giving thanks to God the 
v. 18. Father by him ; " omit " own" in v. 18, and 

read " submit yourselves to your husbands ; " 

instead of " this is well pleasing to the Lord" 
v. 20. in v. 20, read "this is well pleasing, in the 
v. 22. Lord ; " instead of " fearing God" , in v. 22, 

read "fearing the Lord;" omit "and" in v. 
v. 23. 23, and read "whatsoever ye do;" omit "for" 
v. 24. in v. 24, and read "ye serve (or "serve ye") 

the Lord Christ ;" instead of " But he that 
v. 25. doeth" in v. 25, read " For he that doeth." 
Chap. iv. Instead of the words " that ye may stand 

perfect and complete in all the will of God" in 
v. 12. v. 12, read "that ye may stand perfect and 

fully assured in all the will of God;" for "that 
v. 13. he hath a great zeal for you " in v. 13, " that 

he hath much labour for you." 

The First Epistle to the Thessaloxians. 

Chap. i. Omit the words " of you" in v. 2, and read 
v. 2. simply " making mention in our prayers." 

No other change calls for notice in this 

chapter. 
Chap. ii. Insert "And" in v. 13, so as to read "And 



236 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 13. for 1 this cause;" omit "Christ" in v. 19, and 
v. 19. read "our Lord Jesus." 

Chap. iii. Omit again "Christ" in v. 11, and read 
v. 11. simply "our Lord Jesus ; " in like manner, omit 
v. 13. "Christ" in v. 13, and read simply "the coming 

of our Lord Jesus." 
Chap. iv. Insert "as ye also are walking" in v. 1, and 
v. 1. read "to please G6d, as ye also are walking, ye 

would abound yet more;" for "But I would 
v. 13. not" in v. 13, read "But we would not." 
Chap. v. Insert " For" in v. 5, and read "For ye are 
v. 5. all." Nothing else requires notice in this 

chapter. 

The Second Epistle to the Thessalonians. 

Chap', i. Instead of the words " in all them that be- 
v. 10. lieve" in v. 10, read "in all them that believed;" 
v. 12. omit " Christ" in v. 12, and read simply "that 

the name of our Lord Jesus may be." 
Chap. ii. For " the day of Christ " in v. 2, read " the 
v. 2. day of the Lord;" omit the words "as God" in 

v. 4c. v. "4, and read, "so that he sitfceth;" instead of 

v. 8. "the Lord" in v. 8, read "the Lord Jesus;" 

v. 11, for "God shall send them" in v. 11, read "God 

sendeth them." 
Chap. iii. For " by our Lord Jesus Christ " in v. 12, 
v. 12. read "in the Lord Jesus Christ ;" omit "and" 
v. 14. in v. 14, and read " note that man, have no 

company with him." 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 237 

The First Epistle to Timothy. 

Chap. i. For "God our Father" in v. 2, read " God 
v. 2. the Father;" no other change calls for remark 

except those formerly mentioned. 
Chap. ii. Nothing requires to be noticed in this 

chapter. 
Chap. iii. Omit the words, "not greedy of filthy lucre" 
v. 3. in v. 3, and read "no striker, but patient;" no 

other change requires notice except the very 

important one in v. 16, formerly considered. 1 
Chap. iv. Instead of "Jesus Christ" in v. 6, read 
v. 6. "Christ Jesus ; " omit the words "in spirit" in 

v. 12. v. 12, and read "in charity, in faith," etc. 
Chap. v. Omit the words " good and " in v. 5, and 
v. 5. read simply " this is acceptable before God ; " 

v. 16. probably omit " man or " in v. 16, and read 

" If any woman that believeth have widows ; " 
v. 21. instead of "Jesus Christ" in v. 21, read 

" Christ Jesus." 
Chap. vi. Omit the words " from such withdraw thy- 
■v. 5. self" in v. 5, and end the verse with "gain," 

("supposing that godliness is a means of gain;") 
v. 12. omit "also" in v. 12, and read simply "where- 

unto thou wast called;" omit the words "the 
v. 17. living" in v. 17, and read simply "but in God;" 
v. 19. instead of " lay hold of eternal life " in v. 19, 

read "lay hold of the true life." 

1 Corap. p. 141. 



238 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

The Second Epistle to Timothy. 

Chap. i. Instead of "Jesus Christ" in v. 1, read 

v. 1. " Christ Jesus," and make the same change in 

v. 10. v. 10. 

Chap. ii. Instead of the words " Thou therefore en- 
dure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus 

v. 3. Christ " in v. 3, read " Endure afflictions with 

me as a good soldier of Christ Jesus ;" for "the 

v. 7. Lord give thee understanding " in v. 7, read 

" the Lord shall give thee understanding ; " for 

v. 11. "if we deny him " in v. 11, read "if we shall 

v. 13. deny him;" insert "for" in v. 13, and read 
"for he cannot deny himself;" instead of 

v. 19. "the name of Christ" in v. 19, read "the 

v. 21. name of the Lord;" omit "and" in v. 21, and 
read " sanctified, meet for the master's use." 

Chap. iii. No change requires to be noted in this 
chapter. 

Chap. iv. Omit "therefore " in v. 1, and read as fol- 

v. 1. lows, " I charge thee before God and Christ 

Jesus (instead of ' the Lord Jesus Christ '), 
who shall judge the quick and the dead, and 
by His appearing and His kingdom " (instead 
of " at His appearing "). For " the Lord re- 

v. 14. ward him," in v. 14, read "the Lord shall 
reward him." Omit " and " at the beginning 

v. 18. of v. 18, and read "the Lord." 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 239 

The Epistle to Titus. 

Chap. i. Instead of " the Lord Jesus Christ/' in v. 4, 
v. 4. read il Christ Jesus." Nothing more requires 

to be noted in this chapter. 
Chop. ii. Omit " sincerity " in v. 7, and end the verse 
m. 7, 8. with a gravity ;" for " to say of you/' in v. 8, 

read a to say of us :" instead of " our Saviour 
v. 13. Jesus Christ/' in v. 13, read " our Saviour 

Christ Jesus." 
Chap. iii. Xo change required in this chapter. 

The Epistle to Philemon. 

Instead of the words " and to our beloved 

v. 2. Apphia/' in v. 2, read " and to Apphia our sis- 

v. 7. ter." For the words " For vre have " in v. 7, 

read " For I had." Instead of the second " in 

v. 20. the Lord/' in v. 20, read " in Christ." 

The Epistle to the Hebeews. 

Chap. i. Instead of the words u a sceptre of right- 
eousness is the sceptre of Thy kingdom/' in v. 

xx. 8, 3. 8, read " the sceptre/' etc, V. 3 of this chapter 
was formerly noticed, and nothing else demands 
our attention. 1 

Chap. ii. Omit (probably) the words " and didst set 

v. 7. Him over the works of Thy hands/' in v. 7. 

v. 9. The remarkable various reading in v. 9 was 

formerly considered. 2 For the words " par- 

1 Comp. p. 14. 2 Corap. p. 169. 



240 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 15. takers of flesh and blood/' in v. 15, read "par- 
takers of Wood and flesh." 
Chap. iii. Omit the word " Christ " in v. 1, and read 
v. 1. simply " the Apostle and High Priest of our 

profession, Jesus." Omit (perhaps) " firm unto 
v. 6. the end/' in v. 6, and close the verse with 

" hope." Instead of the words, " your fathers 
v. 9. tempted me, proved me," in v. 9, read " your 

fathers tempted by proving (me)." 
Chap. iv. In this chapter a very remarkable various 
reading occurs. Instead of the common text, 
v. 2. " but the word preached did not profit them, 

not being mixed with faith in them that heard 
it," in v. 2, we are compelled by greatly pre- 
ponderating evidence to read, " but the word 
of hearing did not profit them, since they w T ere 
not mingled by faith with those that heard it." 
Chap. v. Instead of the words " but he that is called 
v. 4. of God," in v. 4, read " but being called of 

God." Nothing more calls for notice in this 
chapter. 
Chap. vi. Omit the words " and labour of," in v. 10, 
v. 10. and read " your work, and the love." No other 

change is required. 
Chap. vii. Instead of the words " concerning priest- 
v. 14. hood," in v. 14, read " concerning priests." 
v. 21. Omit (probably) the words " after the order of 
Melchizedek," in v. 21, and end the verse with 
v. 26. " for ever." Insert " also " in v. 26, and read 
" For such an high priest also became us." 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 241 

Chap. viii. Omit " and " in v. 2, and read " the Lord 
v. 2. pitched, not man." Instead of the words " For 

v. 4. if he were on earth/' in v. 4, read, " If, there- 

fore, he were on earth ;" in the same verse omit 
the word " priests," and read " there are those 
that offer." Instead of the words " teach 
v. 11. every man his neighbour," in v. 11, read "teach 
every man his fellow-citizen." Omit the words 
v. 12. "and their iniquities," in v. 12, and read sim- 
ply " their sins will I remember no more." 
Chap. ix. Insert " also " in v. 28, and read " so also 
v. 28. the Christ." Nothing else calls for notice. 
Chap. x. Instead of " sacrifice and offering " in v. 8, 
v. 8. read "sacrifices and offerings." Omit the words 

v. 9. " God," in v. 9, and read simply "to do Thy 

v. 15. will." Omit " before " in v. 15, and read sim- 
ply " after he had said." For the words, " and 
v. 16. in their minds," in v. 16, read "and in their 
mind." Instead of " ye had compassion of me 
v. 34. in my bonds," in v. 34, read " ye had compas- 
sion of those in bonds ;" in the same verse omit 
the words "in heaven," and read, "knowing that 
ye yourselves have a better and an enduring 
substance." Instead of the w T ords " Now the 
v. 38. just shall live by faith," in v. 38, read " Now 

my just one shall live by faith." 

Chap. xi. Instead of the w T ords " so that things which 

v. 3. are seen were not made" in v. 3, read " so that 

that which is seen was not made ;" instead of 

" For he looked for a city which hath founda- 

Q 



242 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 10. tions" in v. 10, read "For he looked for the 

city which hath the foundations ; " omit the 

v. 11. words " and was delivered of a child" in v. 11, 

and read simply " received strength to conceive 

seed, even when," etc. ; omit the w T ords " and 

v. 13. were persuaded of them" in v. 13, and read 

simply " having seen them from afar, and 

greeted them;" for " treasures in Egypt" in 

v. 26. v. 26, read "treasures of Egypt." 

Chap. xii. Instead of the words " If ye endure chasten- 

v. 7. ing," in v. 7, read " It is for chastisement 

that ye are enduring ; " omit the words "' or 

v. 20. thrust through with a dart" in v. 20, and end 

the verse with " stoned." 
Chap. xiii. Instead of the words " Be not carried about" 
v. 9, in v. 9, read " Be not carried away;" omit 

v. 11. the w T ords " for sin" in v. 11, and read simply 
" by the high priest." 

The Epistle of James. . 

Chap. i. Instead of the words " which the Lord hath 
v. 12. promised" in v. 12, read "which He pro- 
mised." A very remarkable reading occurs 
v. 19. in this chapter at v. 19. Instead of the 
" wherefore " of the common text, evidence 
compels us to adopt another word which, in 
* the Greek differs only by a single letter, but 
which requires in English some such version 
as the following, "Know, my beloved brethren, 
and let every one," etc. ; omit the words 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 243 

v. 26. " among you" in v. 26, and read simply "If 

any one thinks." 

Chap. ii. Omit the words "unto him" in v. 3, and 

v. 3. read simply " and say ; " instead of " the poor 

v. 5. of this world" in v. 5, read "the poor of the 

v. 13. world;" omit "and" in v. 13, and read 

" mercy rejoice th against judgment;" omit 

i\ 18. the word "thy" in v. 18, before "works" and 

"my" before "faith," and read simply "shew 

me thy faith without works ; and I will show 

thee faith by my works ;" omit the word 

v. 24. "then" in v. 24, and read simply "ye see 

that." 
Chap. iii. Instead of the words u Behold how great a 
v. 5. matter a little fire kindleth !" in v. 5, read 

" Behold how oreat a forest a little fire kin- 
v. 6. clleth ! " omit the word " so " in v. 6, and read 

" and the tongue is a fire, that world of ini- 
quity ! The tongue is the one among our 
members which defileth the whole body," 
etc.; instead of the words "it is an unruly 
v. 8. evil" in v. 8, read "it is a restless evil; " for 

the words " so can no fountain both yield 
v. 12. salt water and fresh," in v. 12, read " neither 
can salt water bring forth fresh ; " insert the 
v. 16. word a also" in v. 16, and read "there also is 
v. 17. confusion;" omit the word "and" in v. 17, 
and read simply " without partiality, without 
hypocrisy." 
Chap. iv. Omit the word " yet " in v. 2, and read 



244 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 2. simply, " ye have not ; " omit the words 

v. 4. " adulterers and " in v. 4, and read simply 

" ye adulteresses ; " insert the word u but " in 
v. 7. v. 7, and read " submit yourselves therefore to 

v. 11. God, but resist;" instead of "and" in v. 11 
insert " or/ 5 and read " or judgeth his bro- 
ther ; " instead of " There is one lawgiver, who 
is able to save and to destroy ; who art thou 
v. 12. that judgest another ?" in v. 12, read " There 
is one lawgiver and judge, he who is aBle to 
save and to destroy ; but thou, who art thou 
that judgest thy neighbour ? " 

Omit " as " in v. 5, and read simply " ye 
nourished your hearts in a day of slaughter ; " 
instead of " lest ye be condemned " in v. 9, 
read "lest ye be judged;" instead of " which 
endure" in v. 11 read " which have endured;" 
for " lest ye fall into condemnation " in v. 12, 
read "lest ye fall into judgment;" insert "there- 
fore" in v. 16, and read "confess therefore ; " 
insert " my " in v. 19, and read "my brethren." 

The First Epistle of Peter. 

Instead of "honour and glory," in ver. 7, 
read " glory and honour." Instead of " but 
unto us," in v. 12, read "but unto you." In- 
stead of "Be ye holy," in v. 16, read "Ye 
shall be holy." Instead of the words " who by 
21. Him do believe in God," in v. 21, read " who 
through Him are believers in (or faithful 



Chap. v. 


v. 


5. 


v. 


9. 


V. 


11. 


V. 


3 2. 


V. 


16. 


V. 


19. 


Chap. i. 


v. 


7. 


V. 


12. 


V. 


16. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 245 

towards) God." Omit the word "pure," in v. 

v. 22. 22, and read " love one another from the heart 
fervently/' Omit the words " for ever " in 
v. 23. v. 23, and read simply " which liveth and 
abideth." Instead of all the glory of man/' 
v. 24. in v. 24, read " all the glory thereof." 
Chap. ii. Insert the words " unto salvation " in v. 2, 
v. 2. and read " that ye may grow thereby unto sal- 

vation." Instead of the words " Christ also 
suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye 
v. 21. should follow His steps," in v. 21, read " Christ 
also suffered for you, leaving you an example, 
that ye should follow His steps." Instead of 
v. 25. " For ye were as sheep going astray," in v. 25, 

read " Tor ye were going astray as sheep." 

Chap. iii. Instead of the words " be courteous," in v. 8, 

xv. 8, 9. read " be humble." Omit " knowing " in v. 9, 

and read " contrariwise blessing, because ye 

are." Instead of " if ye be followers of," in 

v. 13. v. 13, read " if ye be zealous of." As formerly 

v. 15. noticed, instead of " the Lord God," in v. 15, 

read "the Lord Christ;" 1 in the same verse omit 

" and " before " be ready," and read simply 

" being ready;" in the same verse insert " but " 

after " in you," and read " but with meekness 

v. 20. and fear." Omit "once" in v. 20, and read 

simply " when the longsuffering of God was 

waiting." 

Chap. iv. Omit the words "of our life," in v. 3, and 

v. 3. read simply " For the time past." Omit the 

1 Comp. page 170. 



246 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

words " on their part he is evil spoken of, but 

v. 14. on your part he is glorified" in v. 14, and end 

the verse with the words "resteth upon you." 

v. 16. For the words "on this behalf" in v. 16, read 

v. 19. "in this name." Omit "as" in v. 19, and 

read simply " unto a faithful Creator." 

Chap. v. Insert " therefore " in v. 1, and read " The 

v. 1. elders therefore." Omit the words " taking 

v. 2. the oversight thereof" in v. 2, and read simply 

" Teed the flock of God which is among you, 

not by constraint," etc. Omit the words " be 

v. 5. subject " in v. 5, and read " Likewise, ye 

younger, submit yourselves unto the elder, yea, 

v. 8. all one to another." Omit " because " in v. 8, 

and read simply " Be sober, be vigilant : your 

v. 1*0. adversary." Instead of "us" in v. 10, insert 

" you," and read the verse as follows — " But 

the God of all grace, who called you into His 

eternal glory in Christ Jesus, after ye have 

suffered a little while, shall himself make you 

perfect, stablish, strengthen (settle) you." 

The Second Epistle of Peter. 

Chap. i. Instead of the words " hath called us to 
v. 3. glory and virtue " in v. 3, read " called us by 

His own glory and virtue." Instead of 
v. 12. " Wherefore I will not be negligent " in v. 12, 

read " Wherefore I will take care to." 
Chap. ii. Instead of the words " And many shall fol- 
v. 2. low their pernicious ways " in v. 2, read 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 247 

" And many shall follow their licentious ways." 

v. 12. Instead of " shall utterly perish " in v. 12, read 

" shall even perish." Instead of " covetous 

■v. 14. practices " in v. 14, read " covetous practice." 

Instead of the words " clouds that are carried 

v. 17. with a tempest ' ; in v. 17, read " mists driven 

by a tempest :" probably omit " for ever " in 

the same verse, and end with " is reserved." 

v. 21. Insert "back" in v. 21, and read "to turn 

v. 22. back from." Omit the word " But " in v. 22, 

and read simply, " It is happened." 
Chap. iii. Instead of the words " and of the command- 
ment of us the apostles of the Lord and 
v. 2. Saviour" in v. 2, read " and of the command- 

ment of the Lord and Saviour by your 
apostles." Insert the words "in scoffing" in 
v. 3. v. 3, and read "scoffers in [their] scoffing." 

v. 9. Instead of "us-ward" in v. 9, read "you- ward." 

v. 10. Omit the words "in the night" in v. 10, and 
read simply "will come as a thief." Instead 
v. 16. of " in which are" in v. 16, insert for the sake 
of clearness "in which Epistles," as the read- 
ing of the most ancient authorities requires. 

The Fikst Epistle of John. 

Chap. i. Insert " also " in v. 3, and read " that which 
v. 3. we have seen and heard declare we unto you 

v. 4. also ; " omit " unto you " in v. 4, and read 

simply " these things write we, that," etc. 
Chap. ii. Instead of " brethren" in v. 7 read " be- 



248 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 7. loved ; " in the same verse omit the second 

" from the beginning/' and end with " heard ;" 

instead of " I write unto you, little children " 
v. 13. in v. 13, read " I have written unto you, chil- 
v. 23. dren ; " v. 23 was previously noticed ; x omit 
v. 24. " therefore " in v. 24, and read simply " let 

that abide ; " instead of the words, " ye shall 
v. 27. abide in him" in v. 27, read " abide in him." 
Chap. iii. V. 1 was formerly noticed ; 2 omit " but " in 
vv. 1, 2. v. 2, and read " what we shall be, we know 
v. 13. that," etc. ; omit " my " in v. 13, and read 

" marvel not, brethren ; " omit " his brother " 
v. 14. in v. 14, and read simply " He that loveth not 

abideth in death ; " instead of " we know " in 
v. 19. v. 19, read " we shall know." 
Chap. iv. No change calling for notice requires to be 

made in this chapter, except the omission of 
v. 19. "him" in v. 19. 

Chap. v. The important text vv. 7, 8 was formerly dis- 
vv. 7, 8. cussed : 3 instead pf the words " for this is the 

witness of God which he hath testified of his 
v. 9. Son" in v. 9 read " for this is the witness of 

God, that he hath borne witness respecting his 
v. 13. Son ; " v. 13 was formerly considered. 4 

The Second Epistle of John. 

Instead of " are entered into the world" in 

v. 7. v. 7 ; read " are gone out into the world ; " for 

the words " that Ave lose not those things 

1 Comp. p. 170. 2 Comp. p. 171. 3 Comp. p. 134. 4 Comp. p. 171. 



Text of the % New Testament in its successive Books. 249 

which we have wrought, but that we receive a 
v. 8. full reward" in v. 8, read "that ye lose not 

the things which ye have wrought, but that 
ye receive a full reward ; " instead of " whoso- 
v. 9. ever transgresseth " in v. 9, read " whosoever 

goeth forward ; " in the same verse omit the 
words " of Christ/' and read simply " in the 
doctrine, he hath both/' etc. 

The Third Epistle of John". 

Instead of the words u whatsoever thou 
v. 5. doest to the brethren, and to strangers" in v. 5, 

read " whatsoever thou doest to the brethren, 

and that though they are strangers ; " instead 
v. 7. of " for his name's sake" in v. 7, read "for 

the Name's sake ; " insert the word " some- 
v. 9. thing" in v. 9, and read " I wrote something 

to the church;" omit the second "but" in v. 
v. 11. 11, and read simply " is of God, he that," etc. ; 
v. 12. instead of " ye know " in v. 12, read " thou 
v. 13. knowest;" insert "unto thee" in v. 13, and 

read " to write unto thee." 

The Epistle of Jude. 

v. 1. Instead of " sanctified by God the Father," 

read " beloved by God the Father ; " for " of 

v. 3. the common salvation" in v. 3, read " of our 

common salvation ; " for " denying the only 

v. 4. Lord God" in v. 4 ; read " denying the only 

Master ; " instead of " how that the Lord, 



250 Effect produced hy Textual Criticism upon the 

v. 5. having saved" in v. 5, read "how that Jesus, 

having saved;" and probably in the same 
verse for " knew this " read " knew all ; " 

v. 12. for "carried about" in v. 12, read "carried 
away;" omit the- words "among them" in 

v. 15. v. 15, and read simply "all that are ungodly 
of all their ungodly deeds ;" omit the word 

v. 25. "wise" in v. 25, and insert the words 
"through Jesus Christ our Lord," so as to 
read the verse thus, " to the only God our 
Saviour, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be 
glory, majesty, dominion, and power;" and 
instead of the words " both now and ever," 
read " before all time, and now, and for ever. 
Amen." 

The Book of Eevelatton. 

Chap. i. Instead of " all things that he saw " in v. 2, 

v. 2. read " whatsoever things he saw ; " instead 

vv. 5, 6. of the words in vv. 5, 6, " Unto him that loved 

us, and washed us from our sins in his own 

blood, and hath made us kings and priests 

unto God and his Father ; to him be glory and 

dominion for ever and ever. Amen," read 

" Unto him that loveth us, and washed us 

from our sins in his own blood, and hath 

made us a kingdom, priests unto God and his 

Father, to him be the glory and the dominion 

for ever and ever. Amen;" omit the words 

v. 8. " the beginning and the ending " in v. 8, and 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 251 

in the same verse for " saith the Lord" sub- 
stitute " saith the Lord God/' so as to read 
thus, " I am the Alpha, saith the Lord God;" 

v. 9. omit "also" in v. 9; omit "in the;" for 

"Jesus Christ" read simply "Jesus;" omit 
" for " and " Christ/' so as to read the verse 
thus, " I John, your brother, and companion 
in the tribulation and kingdom and patient 
endurance in Jesus, was in the isle that is 
called Patmos, on account of the word of God, 
and the testimony of Jesus ; " omit the words, 
" I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the 

v. 11. last" in v. 11; omit also the words "which 
are in Asia," and read thus, "saying, What 
thou seest write in a book, and send to the 
seven churches; to Ephesus," etc.; omit "unto 

v. 17. me" in v. 17, and read simply "he laid his 
right hand upon me, saying, Fear not;" omit 

v. 18. the word "Amen" in v. 18, and read simply 
" evermore, and have ; " instead of the words 
"keys of hell and of death" in the same 
verse, read " the keys of death and of Hades ; " 

v. 19. insert "therefore" in v. 19, and read "write 
therefore ; " omit the words " which thou 

v. 20. sawest " in v. 20, and read "the seven candle- 
sticks are," etc. 

Chap. ii. Instead of the words "the church of Ephesus" 

v. 1. in v. 1, read " the church in Ephesus ;" instead 

of "And hast borne, and hast patience, and 

v. 3. for my name's sake hast laboured " in v. 3, 



252 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

read " And Thou hast patience, and didst bear 
for my name's sake ; " omit the word " quickly " 

v. 5. in v. 5, and read simply, " I will come unto 

v. 7. thee.; " omit the words " the midst of" in v. 7, 

and read simply, " which is in the paradise of 

v. 10. God;" instead of " Fear none of 5 ' in v. 10, 
read, " Fear not ; " omit the words " which 

v. 15. thing I hate " in v. 15, and read " the Nicolai- 
tanes, in like manner ; " insert the word 

v. 16. "therefore" in v. 16, and read " Eepent there- 

v. 17. fore;" omit the words "to eat" in v. 17, and 
read simply " will I give of the hidden manna;" 
instead of " I have a few things against thee " 

v. 20. in v. 20, read "I have against thee;" instead 
of " to teach and seduce " in the same verse, 
read " and she teacheth and seduceth ; " instead 

v. 21. of " and she repented not " in v. 21, read "and 
she will not repent," reading the whole verse 
thus — " And I gave her time that she might 
repent ; and she will not repent of her forni- 

v. 24. cation ;" omit " and " in v. 24, and read simply 
"But unto you I say, unto the rest;" omit 
" and " in the same verse before " which." 

Chap, iii. Instead of " are ready to die " in v. 2, read 

v. 2. "were ready to die;" in the same verse, for 

" before God," read " before my God ; " insert 

v. 4. " But " in v. 4, and read " But thou hast ; " in 

the same verse, omit " even," and read simply 
"in Sardis;" for "He that overcometh, the 

v. 5. same " in v. 5, read " He that overcometh 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 253 

v. 7. thus ; " for " no man shutteth " in v. 7, read 

" no man shall shut ; " omit " Behold " in v. 
v. 11. 11, and read simply, "I come quickly;" in- 
stead of "the church of the Laodiceans" in 

v. 14. v. 14, read "the church in Laodicea," 

Chap. iv. Omit "immediately" in v. 2, and read simply 

v. 2. "I was in the spirit;" omit "they had" in 

v. 4. v. 4, and read simply, " and on their heads 

crowns of gold." Some remarkable varieties of 

v. 8. reading occur in v. 8 ; N reads as follows : — 

" Holy, holy, holy, holy, holy, holy, holy, holy, 
Lord God Almighty ; " in B the word " holy " 
is repeated nine times ; in other manuscripts 
it is found twice, six times ; and in A, with 
most others, it occurs three times, which is 
probably correct ; instead of the words " they 

v. 11. are and were created" in v. 11, read "they 
were, and were created." 

Chap. v. Instead of the words "to read the book" in 

v. 4. v. 4, read " to open the book ; " for " took the 

v. 7. book out of" in v. 7, read simply "took it out 

of ; " instead of " having every one of them 

v. 8. harps " in v. 8, read " each having a harp ; " 

instead of the words " made us unto our God 
kings and priests ; and we shall reign on the 

v. 10. earth" in v. 10, read "made them unto our 
God a kingdom and priests, and they [shall] 
reign on the earth ; " for " And the four and 
twenty elders fell down and worshipped Him 

v. 14. that liveth for ever and ever" in v. 14, read 



254 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

simply, " And the elders fell down and wor- 
shipped." 
Chap. vi. Insert "seven" in v. 1, and read " opened 
v. 1. one of the seven seals ; " omit probably " and 

see " in the same verse, and read simply 
" Come ; " in like manner, omit " and see " in 
v. 3, and read as before " Come ; " so again, in 
v. 5, omit " and see," and read " Come ; " and 
once more, omit the same words in v. 7, and 
read simply " Come ; " instead of " white 
robes " in v. 11, read " a white robe; " insert 
" whole " in v. 12, and read " the whole moon." 
, For " after these things " in v. 1, read " after 
this ; " omit the words " w T ere sealed " after 
" Eeuben " in v. 5, and read simply " Of the 
tribe of Eeuben, twelve thousand;" and so 
throughout the passage ; for " And cried " in 
v. 10, read "And they cry; " instead of " living 
fountains of waters " in v. 17, read "fountains 
of the waters of life." 
Chap. viii. Instead of the words, " The first angel 
v. 7. sounded " in v. 7, read " And the first 

sounded ; " insert the w 7 orcls " and the third 
part of the earth was burnt up " in the same 
verse before " and the third part of trees ; " for 
v. 13. "heard an angel" in v. 13, read "heard an 

eagle." 
Chap. ix. Omit the word " only " in v. 4, and read 
v. 4. simply " but those men ; " for " tails like 

unto scorpions, and there w T ere stings in their 



V. 


3. 


V. 


5. 


V. 


7. 


V. 


11. 


V. 


12. 


Chap. vii. 


v. 


1. 


V. 


5. 


V. 


10. 


V. 


17. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Books. 255 

v. 10. tails" in v. 10, read " tails like unto scorpions, 
and [also] stings ; and in their tails was their 

v. 11. power;" omit "And" in v. 11, and read 
" They have ; " omit " and " after " thousand " 

v. 16. in v. 16, and read simply " I heard ; " insert 

v. 18. " plagues" in v. 18, and read "By these three 
plagues ; " for " their power is in their mouth " 

v. 19. in v. 19, read " the power of the horses is in 
their mouth ; " for " nor of their fornication " 

v. 21. in v. 21, read probably "nor of their wicked- 
ness." 

Chap. x. For " he had in his hand " in v. 2, read 

v. 2. " having in his hand;" omit " their. voices " in 

v. 4. v. 4, and read "when the seven thunders spoke;" 

omit also " unto me " in the same verse, and 
read simply "saying;" instead of "the mystery 

v. 7. of God should be finished " in v. 7, read "the 

mystery of God was finished ; " instead of the 

v. 11. words "And he said unto me " in v. 11, read 

" And they say unto me." 
Chap. xi. Omit the words " and the angel stood " in 

v. 1. v. 1, and read simply " saying " after " rod; " 

v. 4. instead of " before the God " in v. 4, read 

"before the Lord;" for " shall see their dead 
bodies " in v. 9, read " look upon their dead 
body;" for " and shall not suffer " in the same 
verse, read " and suffer not ; " instead of "they 
that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over 
v. 10. them, and make merry" in v. 10, read "they 
that dwell upon the earth rejoice over them, 



256 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

and make merry;" for the kingdoms of this 
v. 15. world" in v. 15, read "The kingdom of this 
world;" omit the words " and art to come " in 
v. 17. v. 17, and read simply " which art, and wast." 
Chap. xii. Instead of " woe to the inhabiters of the 
v. 12. earth and of the sea " in v. 12, read simply 
"woe to the earth and the sea;" omit "Christ" 
v. 17. in v. 17, and read simply " the testimony of 

Jesus." 

Chap. xiii. Instead of the words " And I stood upon 

v. 7. the sand of the sea, and saw " in v. 7, read 

" And he stood upon the sand of the sea ; and 

I saw;" for "having seven heads and ten 

horns " in the same verse, read " having ten 

horns and seven heads;" instead of "which gave 

v. 4. ' power unto the beast " in v. 4, read " because 

he gave the power to the beast;" for "in blas- 

v. 6. phemy" in v. 6, read "in blasphemies;" omit 

"and" in the same verse, and read simply "his 

tabernacle, those that;" insert " and peoples " 

#.7. in v. 7, and read " over all kindreds, and 

v. 16. peoples;" instead of "their foreheads" in v. 16, 

read " their forehead." 
Chap. xiv. Instead of " And I looked, and lo, a Lamb" 
v. 1. in v. 1, read " And I looked, and lo, the Lamb;" 

for " having his Father's name written in 
their foreheads," in the same verse, read 
" having his name and the name of his Father 
written in their foreheads ; " for "I heard the 
voice of harpers harping with their harps" in 



Text of the New Testament in its successive looks. 257 

v. 2. v. 2, read " the voice which I heard was as 

that of harpers harping with their harps ; " 
for " And in their mouth was found no guile; 
for they are without fault before the throne 

v. 5. of God" in v. 5, read simply "And in their 

mouth was found no falsehood ; for they are 

v. 8. blameless ; " insert u a second " in v. 8, and 

read " And there followed another, a second 

v. 9. angel;" in like manner read in v. 9 "And 

there followed them another, a third angel ; h 
instead of " Here is the patience of the saints ; 

v. 12. here are they that keep" in v. 12, read " Here 
is the patience of the saints that keep ; " omit 

v. 13. "unto me" in v. 13, and read simply "say- 
ing, Write ; " instead of " and their works " 
in the same verse, read " for their works ; " 

v. 15. omit the words "for thee" in v. 15, and read 
simply " the time is come to reap." 

Chap. xv. Omit the words " and over his mark" in v. 

v. 2. 2, and read simply " and over his image, and 

over the number," etc. ; instead of " thou King 

v. 3. of saints " in v. 3, read "thou King of the na- 

v. 5. tions;" omit "behold" in v. 5, and read simply 

" I looked, and the temple." 

Chap. xvi. Insert "seven" in v. 1 and read "pour out 

v. 1. the seven vials." For "upon the earth" in v. 

v. 2. 2 read " unto the earth." Omit " angel " in v. 

v. 3. 3, and read simply "And the second;" so 

vv. 3, 4, again in vv. 3, 4, etc. throughout ; omit the 

v. 5. words "0 Lord" in v, 5, and read simply 



258 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

"Thou art righteous." In the latter part of 
this verse, the common text is a mere fabrica- 
tion, and instead of " which art, and wast, and 
shalt be, because," etc. we should read " which 
art and wast the Holy One, because/' etc. ; 
v. 6. omit " for " in v. 6, and read simply " they 

are worthy." Instead of the words " And I 
v. 7. heard another out of the altar say" in v. 7, read 

"And I heard the altar saying;" omit the 
v. 14. words " the earth and of " in v. 14, and read 
simply "kings of the whole world." For 
v. 17. "into the air" in v. 17 read "upon the air." 
Chap. xvii. Omit " unto me " in v. 1, and read simply 
v. 2. "saying;" for the word "filthiness" in v. 2, 

read " impurities;" the reading to be adopted 
v. 8. in v. 8 was formerly noticed. 1 Omit " And " 

v. 9. in v. 9, and read simply " Here is the mind." 

v. 10. Omit " and" after fallen in v. 10, and read 
simply " five are fallen, one is." Instead of 
v. 13. the words "and shall give" in v. 13, read "and 
give." Instead of " And the ten horns which 

o 

v. 16. thou sawest upon the beast" in v. 16, read "and 
the ten horns which thou sawest and the beast." 
Chap, xviii. Omit " and" in v. 1, and read simply 
v. 1. "after these things;" omit "mightily" in v. 2, 

v. 2. and read " he cried with a strong voice." In- 

stead of "her sins have reached unto heaven" 
v. 5. in v. 5, read "her sins have cleaved together 

v. 6. even unto heaven." Omit "you" in v. 6, and 

1 Comp. p. 172. 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 259 

read simply, " Bepay her even as she repaid." 
Instead of the words "who judgeth her" 

v. 8. in v. 8, read " who hath judged her." Insert 

v. 13. the word " spice" in v. 13, and read "and 
cinnamon, and spice, and odours." Instead of 

v. 14. the second " are departed from thee " in v. 14, 
read " are perished from thee." In the same 
verse, for "thou shalt find them no more," read 
" men shall find them no more." Instead of 

v. 17. " all the company in ships " in v. 17, read 
" every one that sails to any place." Instead 
of " thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and 

v. 20. prophets" in v. 20, read "thou heaven, and 
ye saints, and apostles, and prophets." Omit 
the words "of whatsoever craft he be" in 

v. 22. v. 22, and read simply " no craftsman shall 
be found." 

Chap. xix. Omit "and" in v. 1, and read "after these 

v. 1. things." In the same verse insert the words 

" as it were," and read " I heard as it were a 
great voice." In the same verse omit the 
word " honour," and read the " salvation, and 
the glory, and the power are our God's/' In- 

v. 15. stead of "the fierceness and wrath" in v. 15, 
read " the fierceness of the wrath." Instead 
of " gather yourselves together unto the supper 

v. 17. of God" in v. 17, read "gather yourselves 
together with the great supper of God." 

Chap. xx. Omit "and" before "after" in v. 3, and 

v. 3. read simply " after that." Instead of " and I 



260 Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the 

saw the dead, small and great, stand before 
v. 12. God" in v. 12, read "and I saw the dead, 

great and small, standing before the throne ;" 
v. 14. insert the words " the lake of fire" in v. 14, 

and read the verse thus — " And death and 

Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This 

is the second death, the lake of fire." 
Chap. xxi. Omit the word " John " in v. 2, and read 
v. 2. simply " and I saw the holy city :" for " a 

v. 3. great voice out of heaven " in v. 3, read " a 

great voice out of the throne ; " instead of 
v. 5. " true and faithful " in v. 5, read " faithful and 

v. 7. true ;" for " shall inherit all things " in v. 7, 

read " shall inherit these things ; " omit the 
v. 9. words "unto me" in v. 9, and read simply 

" and there came one of the seven angels ;" 
v. 11. omit "and" before "her" in v. 11, and read 

simply " having the glory of God : her light ;" 
v. 13. insert " and " three times in v. 13, and read 

" On the east three gates, and on the north 

three gates, and on the south three gates, and 

on the west three gates ; " insert the word 
v. 14. "twelve" in v. 14, and read "the twelve 

names of the twelve apostles ; " instead of 
v. 15. "had a golden reed to measure " in v. 15, read 

" had for a measure a golden reed to measure ; " 
v. 23. instead of " shine in it " in v. 23, read " shine 

on it ; " omit the words " of them which are 
v. 24. saved " in v. 24, and read simply " And the 

nations shall walk by the light of it ; " in the 



Text of the New Testament in its successive Boohs. 261 

same verse omit the words " and honour/' and 
read simply " bring their glory into it." 

Chap. xxii. Omit the word "pure" in v. 1, and read 

v. 1. simply ei And he shewed me a river ; " instead 

of "And there shall be no night there," 

v. 5. in v. 5, read " And there shall be no more 

night." Instead of " and the Lord God of the 

v. 6. holy prophets " in v. 6, read "the Lord God 

of the spirits of the prophets." Insert "and" 

v. 7. in v. 7, and read " and behold." Omit "for " 

v. 9. in v. 9, and read simply " I am thy fellow-ser- 

vant." A very important correction falls to be 

v. 11. made in v. 11, where, instead of "he that is 
righteous, let him be righteous still," read " he 
that is righteous, let him do righteousness still." 

v. 12. Omit " and" in v. 12, and read simply "Behold, 
I come quickly ;" in the same verse, for " accord- 
ing as his work shall be," read " according as 
his work is." Instead of " the beginning and 

v. 13. the end, the first and the last " in v. 13, read 
"first and last, the beginning and the end." 
Another very important correction requires to 

v. 14. be made in v. 14, where, for " Blessed are they 
that do His commandments," read " Blessed 
are they that wash their robes." Omit " for " 

v. 15. in v. 15, and read simply " without are." Omit 

v. 17. "and" before "whosoever will" in v. 17. 

v. 18. Omit "for " in v. 18, and read simply "Itestify;" 
in the same verse, for " shall add unto these 
things," read " shall add unto them ;" for " God 



262 Effect produced by Textual Criticism. 

shall take away his part out of the book of life, 
and out of the holy city, and from the things 

v. 19. which are written in this book " in v. 19, read 
" God shall take away his part from the tree 
of life and from the holy city, which are 
written in this book." Omit the words " Even 

^.20 so " in v. 20, and read simply, " Amen : come, 
Lord Jesus." Instead of " the grace of our 
Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen" 

v. 21. in v. 21, read " the grace of the Lord Jesus be 
with the saints. Amen." 



MUIR AND PATERSON, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH. 



WORKS PUBLISHED 

BY 

T. Sf T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. 



Just published, in crown 8vo, price 6s., 

APOLOGETIC LECTURES ON THE MORAL 

TRUTHS OP CHRISTIANITY. 

The Nature of Christian Morality ; Man ; The Christian and the 
Christian Virtues ; The Devotional Life of the Christian, and 
his Attitude, towards the Church ; /Christian Marriage ; The 
Christian Home ; The State and Christianity ; The Life of the 
Christian in the State ; Culture and Christianity ; Humanity 
and Christianity. 

By C. E. LUTHARDT, D.D., Leipsic. 



By the same Author, in crown 8vo, Third Edition, price 6s., 

LECTURES ON THE FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS 

OP CHRISTIANITY. 

The Antagonistic Views of the World in their Historical Develop- 
ment ; The Anomalies of Existence ; The Personal God ; The 
Creation of the World ; Man; Religion; Revelation; History 
of Revelation — Heathenism and Judaism ; Christianity in 
History ; The Person of Jesus Christ. 
"We have never met with a volume better adapted to set forth, the 
evidences of Christianity in a form suited to the wants of onr day. There 
is no obscurity in the thoughts or in the style ; the language is simple, the 
ideas clear, and the argument logical, and generally, to onr mind, conclusive. 
. . . . The whole of this vast argument is illustrated by various and 
profound learning in ancient and modern writers, and the notes themselves 
are an interesting study. We confidently recommend these valuable Lectures 
both to the student and the general reader, as containing an unusual 
amount of thought and information conveyed in elegant and forcible 
language . " — Guar diem. 

By the same Author, Second Edition, in crown 8vo, 6s., 
APOLOGETIC LECTURES ON THE SAVING 

TRUTHS OF CHRISTIANITY. 
The Nature of Christianity ; Sin ; Grace ; The God-Man ; The 
Work of Jesus Christ ; The Trinity ; The Church ; Holy 
Scripture ; The Means of Grace ; The Last Things. 
" These Lectures contain a resume of the doctrines of the Christian faith . 
The author is a profound thinker, a skilled theologian, a man of wide and 
varied culture, who knows how to express clearly and sharply what he 
believes. The principles of the Gospel are expounded with singular force, 
truth, and gracefulness of diction." — Evangelical Magazine. 

" Dr. Luthardt is a profound scholar, but a very simple teacher, and 
expresses himself on the gravest matters with the utmost simplicity, clear- 
ness, and force." — Litera/ry World. 



2 WORKS PUBLISHED BY T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. 

In Three Volumes, royal 8vo, price 36s., 

HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 

By PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D., 

Author of " The History of the Apostolic Church." 

From the Birth of Christ to Gregory the Great, a.d. 1-600. 

"Dr. Schaff's book is perhaps, taken all in all, the most convenient, 
serviceable, and satisfactory of all our general Church histories, especially 
for students . ' ' — Presbyterian. 



Just published, Third Edition, in crown 8vo, price 6s., 
THE SINLESSNESS OP JESUS: 

AN EVIDENCE FOR CHRISTIANITY. 

By Dr. C. ULLMANN. 

" We welcome it in English as one of the most beautiful productions of 
G-ermany, as not only readable for an English public, but as possessing, 
along with not a few defects, many distinguished excellences. . . . We 
warmly recommend this beautiful work as eminently fitted to diffuse, 
among those who peruse it, a higher appreciation of the sinlessness and 
moral eminence of Christ. The work has been blessed already, and may 
have its use also to an English public." — British and Foreign Evangelical 
Review. 



Sixth Edition, crown 8vo, price 7s. 6d., 

CHRIST'S SECOND COMING; 

Will it be Pre-Millennial ? 

By Bev. DAVID BBOWN, D.D. 

"This is, in our judgment, one of the most able, comprehensive, and 
conclusive of the numerous works which the millenarian controversy has 
called forth." — Watchman. 



Lately published, in crown 8vo, price 3s. 6d., 
APOLOGETIC LECTURES ON JOHN'S GOSPEL. 

By J. J. VAN OOSTEBZEE, D.D., 

PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF UTRECHT. 

I. The Authenticity of St. John's Gospel. 
II. John and the Synoptic Gospels. 

III. John's Account of Christ's Miracles. 

IV. The Johannean Christ. 

V. Table of Apologetical Literature on John's Gospel. 

" The small volume before us is the production of a strong and cultivated 

mind Nothing could be more able, seasonable, and complete. ' 

— Watchman. 



WORKS PUBLISHED BY T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. 3 

In crown 8vo, price 5s., 

ROME AND THE COUNCIL, 
In the Nineteenth Century, 

By FELIX BUNGENEE. 

Translated from the French, with Additions by the Author. 

" We very earnestly commend tins book to the notice of onr readers. It 
is full and accurate in historic data, lucid in arrangement, pointed and 
forcible in style, and at the same time calm, dispassionate, and free from 
exaggeration. It will amply repay a careful perusal." — Evangelical 
Magazine. 



Just published, in crown 8vo, price 4s. 6cl., 

THE LEADING CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES, 

And the Principles on which to Estimate them. 

By GILBERT WAKDLAW, M.A. 

" . . . . It is with great pleasure that we call the attention of the 
reading public to this work of Mr. Wardlaw's." — Courant. 



Third Edition, one volume, crown 8vo, price 5s, 

GOTTHOLD'S EMBLEMS; 

Or, Invisible Things understood by things that are Made. 

By CHRISTIAN SCRIYER, 

Minister of Madgebnrg in 1671. 

Translated from the Twenty-eighth German Edition. 

' ' It is a book for all men, from the beggar on his pallet of straw to the 
prince npon his throne. With a strangely childish eye and charming lip, 
Scriver leads ns forth into natnre, as into a vault, of mirrors, from which 
the image of God everywhere shmes forth." — Clerical Journal. 



In one volume, crown 8vo, price 4s. 6d. Sixth Edition. 

THE SUFFERING SAVIOUR; 

Or, Meditations on the Last Days oe the Sufferings of 
Christ. 

By Dr. E. W. KBUMMACHEB. 

" We give it preference to everything hitherto produced by the gifted 
and devoted anthor. It is divinity of the most thoroughly evangelical 
description. Truth and tenderness have seldom been so successfully com- 
bined." — Christian Witness. 



4 WORKS PUBLISHED BY T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. 

In crown 8vo, price 4s. 6d., 
THE WORDS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 

As altered by Transmission, and ascertained by Modern Criticism. 
A BOOK FOR THE PEOPLE. 

By W. MILLIGAN, D.D. 

Professor of Divinity and Biblical Criticism, Aberdeen. 

AND 

ALEXANDER ROBERTS, D.D., 

Professor of Humanity, St. Andrews. 



In one volume, handsomely bound, crown 8vo, price 7s. 6d., 
THE FOOTSTEPS OF CHRIST. 
Translated from the German of A. Caspers, 
By A. E. RODHAM. ' 



I. Christ for us. 
II. Christ in us. 



III. Christ before us. 

IV. Christ through us. 



" There is much cleepty experimental truth and precious spiritual lore in 
Caspers' book. I do not always agree with his theology, but I own myself 
much profited by his devout utterances." — The Rev. C. H. Sjpurgeon. 



tj. Cheap Edition. In one volume, crown 8vo, price 6s. , 
FRIEDRICH WILHBLM KRUMMACHER: 

AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY. 

Edited by his Daughter, and Translated by Bev. M. G. Easton, 
M.A. Second Edition, revised, with a New Biographical 
Supplement by the Editor, and a Preface by Eev. Dr. Cairns, 
Berwick. 

"This is one of the most charming of autobiographies; thoroughly 
German, but simple, loving, and faithful, abounding in sketches of well- 
known literary and theological characters, and rich in spiritual thought and 
experience. " — Record. 

In one volume, crown 8vo, price 5s. Third Edition, 

LIGHT FROM THE CROSS: 

Sermons on the Passion of our Lord. 

Translated from the German of A. Tholuck, D.D., Professor of 
Theology in the University of Halle. 

By the Eev. B. C. LUNDIN BBOWN, M.A. 

"With no ordinary confidence and pleasure we commend these most 
nohle, solemnizing, and touching discourses." — British and Foreign Evan- 
gelical Revietv. 



z 







IB 



H 



'.>.*' 



m 



I ■ • 



I 'V.**i^ 1 1 



, • ■ 



■ 



■ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Q| 



022 009 294 A 






H 



mi 



fflffi 111 

mem tsm 



wmm 



^9 



